Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

therealmattsteimel t1_jda0hqv wrote

You mean, a product was invented, but it threatened a major industry, so it was shelved? I know there was a very functional electric car about 20ish years ago. They were leased out, and then customers weren't allowed to keep them after whatever time frame. Then they were all crushed. We will never know the amazing things that could be if mega companies would allow it

21

Sometimes_Stutters t1_jdadmng wrote

They mention this in the book “Barbarians at The Gate”. It has less to do with protecting the tobacco industry and more to do with the product development being over budget and the product itself being shit. It was actually developed by RJR / Phillip Morris.

19

DustyDavos t1_jdane30 wrote

Another good book along these lines is “The Devil’s Playbook” by Lauren Etter which covers the rise of Juul and its ultimate acquisition by Altria/Phillip Morris. Great read.

3

Yah_OK_ t1_jday5xo wrote

Thanks for the flash-back.

I read that book during daily commuting circa the mid nineties and remember loving it. And in the early days of the internet I remember looking for a picture of the product mentioned in that chapter and that I never found any.

edit: Also Anecdotally , years later I read Golden Holocaust from a kindle and it was a terrifically interesting "history of , the evolution of, the business of" smoking.

1

sponge_bob_ t1_jdassan wrote

How functional was the battery life? Ms made tablets earlier than Apple but they had short battery lives and weighed like bricks

12

Nunyazbznz t1_jdaq2mo wrote

I think you're speaking of this: https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a32944084/tested-1997-general-motors-ev1-proves-to-be-the-start-of-something-big/

3

FestiveSquidBanned t1_jdb5w3k wrote

On a related note, The very first electric car to be made was made in 1832. So the technology is close to 200 years old at this point.

3

xauching t1_jdb7xw0 wrote

people always think that profit will encourage progress.

more often than not, profit stumps progress.

0

Skunkdunker t1_jdbx8m8 wrote

And also, as we all know, a total lack of reward/extrinsic motivation is the best way to encourage progress.

1

WalkerBRiley t1_jde9e7a wrote

You can see that in any "scientists discover" thread where the main complaint and argument against any further research is how expensive it would be.

1

Spot-CSG t1_jdceavr wrote

Man look up what batteries looked like in the 60s and tell me this product would have been viable. Look up 70s batteries too before you say "well the tech would have evolved".

3

WalkerBRiley t1_jde9m1n wrote

.....And look what they look like today after, you know, the tech has evolved.

1

Skunkdunker t1_jdbwyja wrote

I mean everything you said is true, but also, pretty much the only reason you can buy either of these now is because a company became successful enough to be a 'mega company.' I agree with your criticism of a bloated capitalism stifling innovation, but it doesn't help to include every large company with no differentiation when it is possible for them to cultivate and drive innovation.

1

therealmattsteimel t1_jddat75 wrote

Agreed. Not all companies are created equal. I really do hate lumping things into a convenient little box. My statement was more general, but thankfully, there are exceptions.

1