This is G o o g l e's cache of http://sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/01/gleaming-cube.html as retrieved on 18 Sep 2006 01:58:31 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:np-4-wfGZxIJ:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com/2006/01/gleaming-cube.html+site:sixteenvolts.blogspot.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=18


Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.

Send As SMS

« Home | All things just keep getting better » | We're meddlesome » | Watch out, American, the jungle has a million eyes » | Commandments and meta-commandments » | Can we fix it? Yes, we can! » | Two girls for every boy » | And you do it too! » | My suggestion for an immigration reform » | Against everything bad, and for everything good » | So that we may learn »

Gleaming the cube

I remember my fifth grade geography textbook saying that the concepts of human rights and freedoms are interpreted differently in the Soviet Union than in the West. Well, I guess that is one way to put it. Another sentence that I remember was that whereas we might wonder why Russians want to live in their system, similarly a Russian might find it silly that someone would pay more for a shirt becase it has a small alligator logo in it.

All humour aside, that last sentence actually has a pinch of truth in it: we should have a healthy skeptical attitude to question how much better name brands are to no-name brands. They probably are, but the consumers should keep the name brand manufacturers in their toes. One particular line of products where I can't see much difference are sunglasses. Since I am an average straight man with not much sense of fashion, I can't really tell at all whether a random person that I see on the street is wearing $300 or $10 sunglasses. If any of my readers has such a skill, please elaborate further in the comments. All brands look all pretty much the same to me, and I can't tell much difference in the sunglasses store either.

As a technological optimist who believes the future is so bright that we have to wear shades, I would actually be surprised if a $10 pair of sunglasses sold today at Wal-Mart was in any objective sense worse than any $300 pair of sunglasses ten years ago. (Few things are as utterly idiotic as first stating how much faster computers have got and then wondering why other products have not improved the same way, so I am not going to go on that path here. But this comparison I think is OK.)

Today's expensive brands are of course better, but it's hard for me to see exactly why. Both manufacturers use the same plastics and metals as their raw materials, and once you have a mechanism to mass manufacture certain shapes of frames and lenses, why couldn't the cheap brand manufacturer program this mechanism to produce glasses that have the exact same shape that an expensive brand manufacturer uses? It's not like the cheap manufacturer couldn't just purchase an expensive pair, measure it and then start pumping out copies.

1 comment

One thing is that intellectual property "rights" propably protect the shape and design of the shades.
Another thing might be that the $10 glasses are indeed made of inferior type of plastic (I can surely tell my cheap sunglasses mostly get broken rather quickly) or other materials.
And what about the UV-light protection, I guess a cheapy pair of sun glasses hardly has any?

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

Contact

ilkka.kokkarinen@gmail.com

Buttons

Site Meter
Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]