> I find this topic fascinating is because my first job, in high school, was writing software for the entity that controls the power grid in the Northwest
I wonder if somewhere in bowels of a northwest utility company there is a machine silently chugging away, running code written by a teenage Bill Gates, helping deliver electricity to the masses.
> My first job—other than being a page in Congress, which isn’t a real job—was doing a computer-software project for Bonneville Power Administration, which is a quasi-governmental entity that controls the power grid in the Northwest. We were computerizing the power grid. And the company that BPA had contracted with, TRW, was behind, so the people there scoured the country to see who really knew how to do a certain type of programming, and they found me, because I was sort of infamous as a boy wonder of a certain type of programming.
I guess there were mainframes and not minicomputers? Still, surprising a high school kid would get a coding job in the early 70s.
Of course it was. E.g.:
Whoever isn't fascinated by the modern power grid is slightly dead inside. The same applies to a ton of other "mundane" things, like road and rail networks, sewage systems, garbage disposal and recycling, and so on.
I think a better term would be "rarely noticed".
I feel like the vast majority of people have absolutely no interest in learning about these things, even in a calamitous context.
True, but shows like How It's Made are incredibly popular, even if they give a very very surface view of the details.
Are you saying that we're supposed to take the word of the majority when deciding if something is "mundane"? In that case, almost everything we're discussing and upvoting here on HN is "mundane", because <90% (just a guess) of humans actually give a shit.
I think it's perfectly fine. "Mundane" means "commonplace", "everyday"; it's an antonym of "exotic".
Some people use it in a slightly derogatory fashion because, unlike you, they don't appreciate the complexity and ingenuity of many mundane things. Which is a shame, but I think sadly inevitable, as many (most?) are designed to be unobtrusive; the only time you should notice a sewage system, say, is when it goes wrong.
But there are some complex systems that form the basis of civilization that just cannot be simply dismissed as "mundane", at least in my opinion. Systems that, without their presence and correct end-to-end operation, would result in absolute collapse of civilization. Systems that have been developed and perfected through the work of countless scientists, engineers, and laborers over the span of decades.
The power grid falls into this category, while the aforementioned 19th century movement does not.
Of course, I'm probably not aware of all such systems, and I'd definitely be delighted when someone points one out. Heck, I only learned about the complexity of HDTV standards throughout history on a HN thread today! It does not fall under the category I noted above, but I still found it deeply interesting.
I love talking to people who are interested in anything other than themselves - it really doesn't matter what as long as they are interested in something enough to have learnt and thought about the topic in some depth.
The real shame is so few people are interested in anything at all.
And yes, I agree: it's getting harder and harder to hold a deep conversation with someone on a technical topic, even in a professional setting. Or perhaps I'm just not looking correctly?
Just watch out for the bores that will just parrot whatever they heard on FOX/CNN last night.
Obviously, trying promoting such an idea to a culture that worships the selfie is foolish at best.
I think I disagree that those characteristics necessitate interest. People can consider the fact that the electric grid is an awesome accomplishment, while also having no care for understanding its history or inner workings.
That's true. I just feel that a better term could be used, since "mundane" makes it seem like the thing you're talking about is "no big deal". It just feels wrong to use it on something like the power grid.
One of my still-on-the-shelf projects is to photograph, geo-locate and categorize all the manholes from my city that have been installed prior to WW2 in order to document how the city evolved over time (surprisingly enough my city still has manholes from the early 1900s), because a city with no working sewage system cannot be called a "city".
Twinkie, Deconstructed by Steve Ettlinger. This book is about the ingredients that go into a Twinkie and how they are created. Super informative on the ingredients of everyday foods.
Christien Meindertsma has spent three years researching all the
products made from a single pig. Amongst some of the more
unexpected results were: Ammunition, medicine, photo paper,
heart valves, brakes, chewing gum, porcelain, cosmetics, cigarettes,
conditioner and even bio diesel.
According to the Amazon customers, the mentioned book was written by a non-technical person (actually, I've checked, a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology) and was apparently also without the careful editor. Alternatively, if somebody has read this book, maybe he can say that it's not that bad? I wouldn't like to buy it just to discover it's written like this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13103538
I strongly suspect the grid will be severely diminished by distributed renewable energy.
The author of this book was on NPR/Fresh Air in August. It was a great listen/read if you are interested in the subject.
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/22/490932307/aging-and-unstable-t...
I heard it a couple of days after a weather related power cut and ended up in the rabbit hole of the risk from cyber warfare/terrorism and solar flares. I'm not sure I would recommend that rabbit hole if you have any concerns about the reliance of society on technology and just in time shipping!