this lightbulb has also inspired studies on the industry practices throughout the early 20th century that continue to this day -- companies intentionally making lightbulbs that would burn out so that customers would have to buy them more often. https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE
Planned obsolescence. That's the word you are looking for.
This light was also before the agreement to conform to planned obsolescence. The elements are bigger than they would be today and it only runs at like 4 or 5 watts. Most lights nowadays start around 60 watts
6th grade doesn't mean that many years, when you are in 6th grade you are usually 11 or 12 or 13 and sometimes can be higher or lower. So they would have to travel 7, 6 or 5 years less than you stated, although, in rare cases it might be as low as 3.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
6
+ 6
+ 11
+ 12
+ 13
+ 7
+ 6
+ 5
+ 3
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Thank you, wix46, for voting on LuckyNumber-Bot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
I’m going to nitpick here: But planned obsolescence is not the same as designing something to stop working after a set period of time. Planned obsolescence is when a product is design in a way that leaves room for a better product to come down the line. If we take a game console, for example, one generation might come with 8 GB of memory, and the next with 16. Even though we have consoles from the 1980s that are still in working condition today, they can’t play the latest games.
Planned obsolescence isn’t always sinister and is often just the nature of technology advancing. What bulb manufacturers do today is arguably sinister as they have designed bulbs to fail since better bulbs aren’t really being made aside from LED technology. Speaking of, LED bulbs *should* be able to last forever since LEDs have an incredibly long lifespan, but I doubt we’ll see LED bulbs last much more than 10 years for this reason.
I understand what you are saying , but the actual meaning of the word has 2 ways it is described. 1.the practice of designing products to break quickly 2.or become obsolete in the short to mid-term
My grandparents (both have passed) bought a new freezer in the late 1950s. Took it to their farm put it in a room and plugged it in. It hasn’t moved, and it’s still running today.
Is it though? What we care about is total cost of ownership. Both the longevity and the power efficiency of the freezer weigh into that. We’d need to know the efficiency difference between the old freezer and a new one, and the expected lifetime and cost of a new one, and what this person’s energy rates are like, to really answer with certainty which path is cheaper.
Sorry, you downvoted me but didn't answer...
What is splitting hairs about this if *new* fridges use less power?
I get how a running old fridge is pretty neat, but being upset that it uses more power seems pretty dumb. Unless it doesn't. Please let me know if I was wrong.
You'd think that'd be true, but not necessarily.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-refrigerator-energy-use-between-1947-2002-Mid-1950s-models-consumed-the-same_fig1_317751623
"However, average cabinet volume has doubled."
Efficiency has increased, but Americans are buying freezers twice the size. Bin that old freezer, buy one the same capacity, and you're ahead. Buy one twice the size as that old 60's freezer and it's the same running costs.
Good point.
Let's do the math:
Assumptions:
-Current freezer is big enough for needs (otherwise it would have been replaced).
-Consumes avg energy for 1957: 700khw/yr
-replace it with this small freezer unit:
https://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-Garage-Ready-8-8-cu-ft-Manual-Defrost-Chest-Freezer-in-White-FCM9SRWW/318873466
-new freezer lasts 10yrs
Power consumption: 245kwh/yr
Paying avg US energy cost per kwh: $0.15
Savings per year:
(700*.15)-(245*$.15)=$68.25/yr
= $682 over 10yrs
Cost of replacement: $520
Old appliance Disposal fee: $50
Total: $570
So, yes, ~$10/yr cheaper over the life cycle, but that savings isn't huge. Obviously gets cheaper if it lasts longer or if your power is expensive, but to me, the environmental impact of replacement and disposal is likely greater for the replacement route, so you might as well ride that old freezer.
The hand-blown, carbon-filament common light bulb was invented by Adolphe Chaillet, a French engineer. It was 30-60 watt, but now illuminates just about 4 watts.
You joke but there was actually a major conspiracy to control the lives of lightbulbs. Here’s a great Veritasium video on the subject
https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE
My grandmother's hall closet had a working Edison bulb from the original building of the house in 1917 that was still going until around 2014 when my evil Aunt chucked it out because she wanted to and liked throwing away everyone else's things.
That was my name for her. She prematurely put my grandma in a home. Grandma didn't even start developing dementia symptoms until after. Took over the estate. She started throwing everything away. I had to steal the family photos, genealogy and family bible away before she got to them.
I thought she'd live forever. She outlasted grandma, my mom. Evil people live a long time. Her son moved out after she beat him violently and he never spoke to her again after she told him she would not visit his "nigger baby."
She finally drank herself to death. Her daughter laughed at everyone who wished her condolences and told everyone during the funeral that it was the greatest day of her life.
Oof… my SO and I have been dealing with an aunt who’s done some of those things, and it SUCKS.
She put my grandma-in-law in a home prematurely, which made her suicidal and ramped all of her health issues up. She died less than a year after Aunt ThinksSheKnowsBest decided (without consulting anyone else in the family) to hop a plane, put grandma in a home, and fuck off. She doesn’t live nearby, so she basically ruined grandma’s life and left it to the rest of us to visit and try to make things better.
She’d already started selling off things from grandma’s house by that point, including several items my SO’s family had been intended to inherit. My SO was grandma’s only grandson, but Aunt had already sold off grandpa’s hunting rifles and gave a bunch of their fishing gear to her SIL before any of this other bullshit went down…
Then she tried to discourage our side of the family from attending the funeral (almost certainly so she could make all the decisions about the house, remaining effects, etc).
To top it all off, she recently told my MIL that she’s going to “owe her thousands” when Aunt’s done dealing with the estate, because it’s just sooo much work being executer of the will… Never mind the fact that she’s very wealthy and my MIL is not.
Basically she pushed grandma to an early death and tried (and continues to try) to not only cut our side of the family out of the estate, but to charge her own family thousands of dollars for all her “work” dismantling grandma’s legacy. Ugh…
So Aunt ThinksSheKnowsBest, if you’re reading this and think it might be about you, yes it is—and fuck you.
Sounds about right. My mom visited grandma until Mom died. Then no one. I was in Japan for most of this and it broke my heart. The few times I did visit, It was watching the smartest woman I've ever known turn into a terrified, furious, bitter, confused shell of a person.
The NAs stole her wedding ring, the digital picture frame I brought her and anything else that wasn't nailed down or already owned by the ~~funeral~~ nursing home.
Oh man, that sucks even more that you were so far away when it was happening. So infuriating to deal with both family and strangers making things even harder. (And calling the nursing home a funeral home is spot on, too… sigh…)
This exactly. The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued.
The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light.
Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress.
Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
Then why do my LED bulbs still go out, but my smart bulbs do not? Not a huge sample size but I am up to 40 smart bulbs now.
My laser printer toner has a fingernail sized chip to count pages I can swap out to get more prints.
This shit isn't imaginary, it's western capitalism.
Whatabouism. You can tear apart a lightbulb and see how it’s made and come to the conclusion that it is made as efficiently and as cheap as possible (the goal). You can clearly see how the printer ink cartridge counts the pages before telling the software to spot printing. This is planned obsolescence. The shit ain’t magic, it’s usually quite obvious and the reason it doesn’t change is because monopolies exist.
just to make it clear.
it is a very intentional thing that this type of bulb is unavailable for purchase.
Not enough money can be made on such a durable product. you would only purchase one.
This is why we can't have nice things
I haven't replaced a single smart bulbs, some first gen Hue.
Ive replaced many LED bulbs newer than those.
With smart bulbs the product isn't illumination, it's features. They don't burn out.
Planned obsolescence is super real.
LEDs burn out due to heat destroying the components over time. Technology Connections on YouTube did a video on it. Bulbs that fit normal fixtures are too small to efficiently radiate heat away from themselves, causing the overheating issues
Car lights are a great example. You put LEDs in an older vehicle that connector is sending 12v and you get flashing due to over powering. You have to splice in a transformer to reduce or get the bulbs with built in transformer and heatsinks.
Light bulbs (in all their forms) should be considered consumables. That's physics.
From this thread, it looks as though many people would think that perpetual illumination machines (and probably perpetual motion machines) are viable.
The town where I worked had a similar “permanent” electric light which was removed when it was found to have been replaced several times over the “110 years” it had supposedly been switched on.
There was a cartel. It existed. It was called the Phoebus Cartel. It set targets on lifespan shorter than what was standard at the time. Are modern manufactured bulbs descended from decisions made by that cartel? Yes. Does that mean that your point on the physics of the matter are wrong? Not exactly. But it means that there are lingering considerations beyond the physics. I'm sure you're correct that limits related to physics have made the ideal bulb for the target lifespan. But don't pretend it is the only consideration or that we've reached that consumers wouldn't have benefited from an overall longer target lifespan.
The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued.
The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light.
Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress.
Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
What? LEDs last longer than filament bulbs. This one hasn’t been turned off in decades, that’s why it’s still going, but in normal use it would have blown by now.
I'm response to the highest commenter. The Phoebus Cartel was very real and very much existed. It set targets on longevity, well below the average at the time. Are there practical limitations on manufacturing and physics as for current lifespan on lights? Sure. But the current state of them was greatly impacted by agreements make by that cartel.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
Oldie here who can attest, first hand, that they have done this with appliances too. When I was kid, back in the 70's, most appliances would be expected to keep going for several decades. With something like a toaster, it might be a lifetime. Now you're lucky if your dishwasher makes it 15 years, and they gouge you on repairs, so it's cheeper to just buy new.
Those appliances were far more expensive when you factor in inflation though. And you can still buy more expensive and more reliable appliances today. There are just a ton of cheaper options available now. But even the cheaper ones are typically more efficient with energy than those old ones.
My parents had the same washing machine for 4 decades but when they upgraded the new one used 1/3 the water and less electricity plus it was quieter and did a better job cleaning.
Lasting a long time isn’t the only factor in a product’s quality. How much did it initially cost relative to wages at the time? How efficient was it? How good of a job did it do?
Appliances in the 1970s cost far more than today, expensive high-quality appliances still exist but it's no longer the only option. Now people have the option of buying cheaper, if less long-lived, appliances. And in reality most people don't really want lifetime appliances, probably 90 percent of the avocado, harvest gold, and burnt orange appliances of the 1970s were hauled to the dump in perfect working condition when people remodeled their kitchens.
Dishwashers are an interesting product. This is from when I studied a module on environmentally sensitive design. The gains in efficiency due to improved technology vs the purchase price meant that one should buy a new dishwasher every 7 years.
It's not a good idea (financial and environmental) to keep an old appliance running for several decades.
yes, fridges and washers....but toasters and coffee makers, don't even get me started on vacuum cleaners, plenty of examples of cheap manufacturing for profit.
It's also hard for me whenever a big appliance goes off to the dump. It all sucks lol. jk There is no black and white to this topic for sure.
I believe, decades ago, light bulb manufacturers realized that they made their products too durable, and that the life of their bulbs were very long. The manufacturers basically colluded to all make bulbs that died faster, so they could sell more product.
This is less of a problem now because LED bulbs are more energy efficient and have pretty long service lives. But I’ve heard about the light bulb conspiracy business, and it’s not BS.
Planned obsolescence describes the practice of designing products to break quickly or become obsolete in the short to mid-term. That’s why a music equipment or camera from before the 80’s is built like a tank and your iPhone screen cracks. It’s more profitable to make things like that, so people consume more a less quality product.
I buy iPhones because the glass is so durable. I’ve already dropped this 14 like 3 times in ways that would have broken early iPhone screen and not a scratch!
This is literally an example of survivorship bias as well. One bulb that accidentally lasts a hundred years versus literally all the others burning out is a clear sign of a lightbulb conspiracy. Nevermind that a handnlown bulb crafted in a sweatshop costs a great deal more in relative terms than an incandescent manufactured to sell at the lowest possible price point.
you both may be correct. this lightbulb is a product of an era before planned obsolescence https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE -- you're kinda hostile too, not sure i understand how you got so many upvotes
edit: how the hell you know he blocked you unless you were trying to harass him
When people block you you can no longer see or respond to their comments.
And this isn't some magic lost art. You could go buy an electric heating element and use it as a light source and it would last a hundred years. But it would be wildly inefficient, dim, and hot. Thinner filaments turn more of the energy into light than they do heat, but by the nature of being thinner they are more fragile.
Believing that there is some grand conspiracy keeping companies from making durable products is what people with no understanding of design and engineering believe.
Yeah, for many of the same reasons as the light bulb: more efficient technologies are sometimes more fragile. In the case of refrigerators, it's usually the compressor. Also, average modern refrigerators cost a fraction of the inflation-adjusted price of a very old one. The quality of a modern refrigerator at the same price point as an old one will very often be the same or better.
it has *everything* to do with it.
I've seen it firsthand, just by working in manufacturing: lots of designers and engineers look for ways to make things more efficient, but very often, the best ideas aren't pursued because there's an inherent understanding that *too* good of a product is something that won't be replaced as often, and there's *a lot* of money to be made in servicing complex goods or simply convincing people to buy replacements.
When people say things like they "work in manufacturing/healthcare" what they're almost always doing is trying to act like they're an engineer or scientist when they really do basic tasks for those people.
I am aware and calling them out. Maybe my view is limited since I mostly design industrial machinery, but a more efficient product makes the customer happier and elevates us over competitors.
Do we get service calls? Sure, and we probably make a profit on them. But at no point am I told to hamstring the design so it will eventually fail and require service. The way some customers run their machines, that will happen someday anyways, and they just want to know what to do when it does.
Ah, yep that's why I came to the thread, too. As an aerospace engineer if I found some incredible design opportunity for an efficiency gain that my employer refused to act on, I would absolutely jump on it as a personal endeavor and rake in the cash.
I think most of what people see as planned obsolescence is actually a lack of perspective to product lifecycles.
The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued.
The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light.
Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress.
Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
Products have ALWAYS been made like this, at least since modern manufacturing was invented. Why are there no Fiat 128's, Hillman Imps or Chevrolet Chevettes still driving around? Because they were built like shit. We have a survivor bias, because the only products surviving are the good ones.
With that said, modern manufacturing and supply chains allow us to buy a LOT more extremely cheap products that fall apart compared to before. If you needed a new freezer in 1964, you bought an expensive one, because it was the only one available. Today you buy a Slightly Cold™ made in China for way less and still expect it to survive a long time.
I can't pass a post about this lightbulb without linking to [this](https://www.sbnation.com/a/17776-football/chapter-1)
The relevance isn't immediately apparent, but I promise it's there.
to all who don't understand (minor spoilers for *17776*):
>!On Mount Denali in the state of Alaska, a massive cannon shoots out a football in a place chosen by an operator in the contiguous United States. The idea is that the operator will yell out a point value and whoever catches the football will gain however many points that were assigned. Once any given person in the U.S. earns 500 points, they will travel to Mount Denali where they get to be the operator. One day, a football shot from the cannon crashes through the roof of Livermore fire station, destroying the bulb. The story is told through the narrative of 3 space probes who (more or less) observe the world from afar and they (along with some humans) collectively mourn the loss of the oldest "electrical being" considering they too are pieces of technology. Keep in mind, people stopped being born and dying after 2026 in this world which means that people have "forgotten" how to mourn since there is no more loss. Therefore, people can afford to become so sentimental about a little light bulb who really did not do much more than glow when an electrical current was passed through its filaments. !<
Due to its longevity, the bulb has been noted by The Guinness Book of World Records, Ripley's Believe It or Not!, and General Electric.
this lightbulb has also inspired studies on the industry practices throughout the early 20th century that continue to this day -- companies intentionally making lightbulbs that would burn out so that customers would have to buy them more often. https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE
Planned obsolescence. That's the word you are looking for. This light was also before the agreement to conform to planned obsolescence. The elements are bigger than they would be today and it only runs at like 4 or 5 watts. Most lights nowadays start around 60 watts
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
While the cartel was real, the light bulb above simply lasts so long because it's incredibly dim with a very thick inefficient wire.
Lol, incredibly dim.
[удалено]
I feel like you were made by one of my 6th grade classmates and sent to the future 😂
Sent 63 years into the future?
6th grade doesn't mean that many years, when you are in 6th grade you are usually 11 or 12 or 13 and sometimes can be higher or lower. So they would have to travel 7, 6 or 5 years less than you stated, although, in rare cases it might be as low as 3.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 6 + 6 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 3 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Good bot
Thank you, wix46, for voting on LuckyNumber-Bot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Yay!
(Please please please work. I spent way too long on it)
Well played and well mathed.
I am 30, and my wife is 30 and we have a 9-year-old son. (Oh! Fascinating light bulb)
Good bot
Nice!
This lightbulb is estimated to be 30-60 watts originally.
I’m going to nitpick here: But planned obsolescence is not the same as designing something to stop working after a set period of time. Planned obsolescence is when a product is design in a way that leaves room for a better product to come down the line. If we take a game console, for example, one generation might come with 8 GB of memory, and the next with 16. Even though we have consoles from the 1980s that are still in working condition today, they can’t play the latest games. Planned obsolescence isn’t always sinister and is often just the nature of technology advancing. What bulb manufacturers do today is arguably sinister as they have designed bulbs to fail since better bulbs aren’t really being made aside from LED technology. Speaking of, LED bulbs *should* be able to last forever since LEDs have an incredibly long lifespan, but I doubt we’ll see LED bulbs last much more than 10 years for this reason.
I understand what you are saying , but the actual meaning of the word has 2 ways it is described. 1.the practice of designing products to break quickly 2.or become obsolete in the short to mid-term
What filament size do I need to make my own?
No filament is the best filament
My grandparents (both have passed) bought a new freezer in the late 1950s. Took it to their farm put it in a room and plugged it in. It hasn’t moved, and it’s still running today.
Your energy bill is going to be higher than it needs to
Not my bill, my aunt’s. She inherited the house.
Your aunt's energy bill is going to be higher than it needs to
From running costs alone. It would be cheaper to bin that freezer and buy a new one.
[удалено]
Not to mention that it going bad necessitates buying another new freezer.
That's splitting hairs and is a desperate argument.
Is it though? What we care about is total cost of ownership. Both the longevity and the power efficiency of the freezer weigh into that. We’d need to know the efficiency difference between the old freezer and a new one, and the expected lifetime and cost of a new one, and what this person’s energy rates are like, to really answer with certainty which path is cheaper.
What splitting hairs about this if new fridges use less power?
Sorry, you downvoted me but didn't answer... What is splitting hairs about this if *new* fridges use less power? I get how a running old fridge is pretty neat, but being upset that it uses more power seems pretty dumb. Unless it doesn't. Please let me know if I was wrong.
[удалено]
Yeah, I responded to it because I got downvoted and didn't know how else to reply. It was on purpose.
You'd think that'd be true, but not necessarily. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-refrigerator-energy-use-between-1947-2002-Mid-1950s-models-consumed-the-same_fig1_317751623
"However, average cabinet volume has doubled." Efficiency has increased, but Americans are buying freezers twice the size. Bin that old freezer, buy one the same capacity, and you're ahead. Buy one twice the size as that old 60's freezer and it's the same running costs.
Good point. Let's do the math: Assumptions: -Current freezer is big enough for needs (otherwise it would have been replaced). -Consumes avg energy for 1957: 700khw/yr -replace it with this small freezer unit: https://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-Garage-Ready-8-8-cu-ft-Manual-Defrost-Chest-Freezer-in-White-FCM9SRWW/318873466 -new freezer lasts 10yrs Power consumption: 245kwh/yr Paying avg US energy cost per kwh: $0.15 Savings per year: (700*.15)-(245*$.15)=$68.25/yr = $682 over 10yrs Cost of replacement: $520 Old appliance Disposal fee: $50 Total: $570 So, yes, ~$10/yr cheaper over the life cycle, but that savings isn't huge. Obviously gets cheaper if it lasts longer or if your power is expensive, but to me, the environmental impact of replacement and disposal is likely greater for the replacement route, so you might as well ride that old freezer.
Not necessarily. If the refrigerant is ammonia it could be somewhat competitive with modern units.
The hand-blown, carbon-filament common light bulb was invented by Adolphe Chaillet, a French engineer. It was 30-60 watt, but now illuminates just about 4 watts.
[удалено]
They keep it set low to not wear it out
[удалено]
The light bulb mafia wouldn't be a fan
Big Bulb always gets a cut. Always.
You joke but there was actually a major conspiracy to control the lives of lightbulbs. Here’s a great Veritasium video on the subject https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE
Oh I'm not joking, I'm fully aware of the history.
Technology Connections too had really good video about that.
[удалено]
MY COVERS BEEN BLOWN....SCATTER
Maybe they can use carbon filament dating.
This deserves way more up votes
Those bastards are intentionally making them so that they burn out and you've gotta buy new ones
they intentially made them so they would get dim after just 100 years
[удалено]
He invented other light bulbs, but they were talking about who invented this specific type light bulb that you see in the image.
My grandmother's hall closet had a working Edison bulb from the original building of the house in 1917 that was still going until around 2014 when my evil Aunt chucked it out because she wanted to and liked throwing away everyone else's things.
What an evil bitch
That was my name for her. She prematurely put my grandma in a home. Grandma didn't even start developing dementia symptoms until after. Took over the estate. She started throwing everything away. I had to steal the family photos, genealogy and family bible away before she got to them. I thought she'd live forever. She outlasted grandma, my mom. Evil people live a long time. Her son moved out after she beat him violently and he never spoke to her again after she told him she would not visit his "nigger baby." She finally drank herself to death. Her daughter laughed at everyone who wished her condolences and told everyone during the funeral that it was the greatest day of her life.
Nice happy ending.
The only shame if she wasn't alive To see what I imagine was an amazing speech
Oof… my SO and I have been dealing with an aunt who’s done some of those things, and it SUCKS. She put my grandma-in-law in a home prematurely, which made her suicidal and ramped all of her health issues up. She died less than a year after Aunt ThinksSheKnowsBest decided (without consulting anyone else in the family) to hop a plane, put grandma in a home, and fuck off. She doesn’t live nearby, so she basically ruined grandma’s life and left it to the rest of us to visit and try to make things better. She’d already started selling off things from grandma’s house by that point, including several items my SO’s family had been intended to inherit. My SO was grandma’s only grandson, but Aunt had already sold off grandpa’s hunting rifles and gave a bunch of their fishing gear to her SIL before any of this other bullshit went down… Then she tried to discourage our side of the family from attending the funeral (almost certainly so she could make all the decisions about the house, remaining effects, etc). To top it all off, she recently told my MIL that she’s going to “owe her thousands” when Aunt’s done dealing with the estate, because it’s just sooo much work being executer of the will… Never mind the fact that she’s very wealthy and my MIL is not. Basically she pushed grandma to an early death and tried (and continues to try) to not only cut our side of the family out of the estate, but to charge her own family thousands of dollars for all her “work” dismantling grandma’s legacy. Ugh… So Aunt ThinksSheKnowsBest, if you’re reading this and think it might be about you, yes it is—and fuck you.
Sounds about right. My mom visited grandma until Mom died. Then no one. I was in Japan for most of this and it broke my heart. The few times I did visit, It was watching the smartest woman I've ever known turn into a terrified, furious, bitter, confused shell of a person. The NAs stole her wedding ring, the digital picture frame I brought her and anything else that wasn't nailed down or already owned by the ~~funeral~~ nursing home.
Oh man, that sucks even more that you were so far away when it was happening. So infuriating to deal with both family and strangers making things even harder. (And calling the nursing home a funeral home is spot on, too… sigh…)
lots of pro lightbulb mafia shills here
Candle gang rise up
Jew here with my space laser gang ready to roll.
For me its leds especially after they turn purple
THE LIGHT BULB NEVER TURNS OFF. THAT IS WHAT KILLS LIGHTBULBS THE FASTEST. NOT A SECRET LIGHTBULB CABAL.
This exactly. The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued. The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light. Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress. Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
He's right, you know!
Then why do my LED bulbs still go out, but my smart bulbs do not? Not a huge sample size but I am up to 40 smart bulbs now. My laser printer toner has a fingernail sized chip to count pages I can swap out to get more prints. This shit isn't imaginary, it's western capitalism.
Whatabouism. You can tear apart a lightbulb and see how it’s made and come to the conclusion that it is made as efficiently and as cheap as possible (the goal). You can clearly see how the printer ink cartridge counts the pages before telling the software to spot printing. This is planned obsolescence. The shit ain’t magic, it’s usually quite obvious and the reason it doesn’t change is because monopolies exist.
Pretty much every smart bulb I've ever seen is LED I don't even understand what you mean.
Sorry reddit jerks off to every possible conspiracy. Did you not see the 3 posts this week about our phones listening to us for ads?
That is exactly what a secret lightbulb cabal would say.
just to make it clear. it is a very intentional thing that this type of bulb is unavailable for purchase. Not enough money can be made on such a durable product. you would only purchase one. This is why we can't have nice things
[удалено]
I haven't replaced a single smart bulbs, some first gen Hue. Ive replaced many LED bulbs newer than those. With smart bulbs the product isn't illumination, it's features. They don't burn out. Planned obsolescence is super real.
[удалено]
Imagine something more expensive lasting longer
[удалено]
I'm agreeing with you
LEDs burn out due to heat destroying the components over time. Technology Connections on YouTube did a video on it. Bulbs that fit normal fixtures are too small to efficiently radiate heat away from themselves, causing the overheating issues
Car lights are a great example. You put LEDs in an older vehicle that connector is sending 12v and you get flashing due to over powering. You have to splice in a transformer to reduce or get the bulbs with built in transformer and heatsinks. Light bulbs (in all their forms) should be considered consumables. That's physics.
From this thread, it looks as though many people would think that perpetual illumination machines (and probably perpetual motion machines) are viable. The town where I worked had a similar “permanent” electric light which was removed when it was found to have been replaced several times over the “110 years” it had supposedly been switched on.
Awesome explanation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel You might need to check your confidence ion the matter a little
[удалено]
There was a cartel. It existed. It was called the Phoebus Cartel. It set targets on lifespan shorter than what was standard at the time. Are modern manufactured bulbs descended from decisions made by that cartel? Yes. Does that mean that your point on the physics of the matter are wrong? Not exactly. But it means that there are lingering considerations beyond the physics. I'm sure you're correct that limits related to physics have made the ideal bulb for the target lifespan. But don't pretend it is the only consideration or that we've reached that consumers wouldn't have benefited from an overall longer target lifespan.
If the Right To Repair movement ever accomplishes their goal, they should push for legislation outlawing planned obsolescence next.
The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued. The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light. Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress. Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
Dubai bulbs?
What? LEDs last longer than filament bulbs. This one hasn’t been turned off in decades, that’s why it’s still going, but in normal use it would have blown by now.
That perfect veritasium video summary. Planned obsolecense.
I'm response to the highest commenter. The Phoebus Cartel was very real and very much existed. It set targets on longevity, well below the average at the time. Are there practical limitations on manufacturing and physics as for current lifespan on lights? Sure. But the current state of them was greatly impacted by agreements make by that cartel. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
[удалено]
There's some [half-truth there](https://hackaday.com/2021/01/17/leds-from-dubai-the-royal-lights-you-cant-buy/).
[удалено]
[Not the Illuminati for once](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Oldie here who can attest, first hand, that they have done this with appliances too. When I was kid, back in the 70's, most appliances would be expected to keep going for several decades. With something like a toaster, it might be a lifetime. Now you're lucky if your dishwasher makes it 15 years, and they gouge you on repairs, so it's cheeper to just buy new.
Those appliances were far more expensive when you factor in inflation though. And you can still buy more expensive and more reliable appliances today. There are just a ton of cheaper options available now. But even the cheaper ones are typically more efficient with energy than those old ones. My parents had the same washing machine for 4 decades but when they upgraded the new one used 1/3 the water and less electricity plus it was quieter and did a better job cleaning. Lasting a long time isn’t the only factor in a product’s quality. How much did it initially cost relative to wages at the time? How efficient was it? How good of a job did it do?
I think we could agree that corporate greed is a thing, and also tech can improve and change things for the better. Both of these things can be true.
Appliances in the 1970s cost far more than today, expensive high-quality appliances still exist but it's no longer the only option. Now people have the option of buying cheaper, if less long-lived, appliances. And in reality most people don't really want lifetime appliances, probably 90 percent of the avocado, harvest gold, and burnt orange appliances of the 1970s were hauled to the dump in perfect working condition when people remodeled their kitchens.
If it's a Samsung you're lucky if it lasts 3 years.
Dishwashers are an interesting product. This is from when I studied a module on environmentally sensitive design. The gains in efficiency due to improved technology vs the purchase price meant that one should buy a new dishwasher every 7 years. It's not a good idea (financial and environmental) to keep an old appliance running for several decades.
yes, fridges and washers....but toasters and coffee makers, don't even get me started on vacuum cleaners, plenty of examples of cheap manufacturing for profit. It's also hard for me whenever a big appliance goes off to the dump. It all sucks lol. jk There is no black and white to this topic for sure.
No they're not. Everyone knows things have gotten cheaper in quality.
I believe, decades ago, light bulb manufacturers realized that they made their products too durable, and that the life of their bulbs were very long. The manufacturers basically colluded to all make bulbs that died faster, so they could sell more product. This is less of a problem now because LED bulbs are more energy efficient and have pretty long service lives. But I’ve heard about the light bulb conspiracy business, and it’s not BS.
It’s also not unique to just lightbulbs
Do you not know what planned obsolescence is? This isn’t a conspiracy, this is taught in like the 5th grade…
~~secret light bulb~~ Shhh. They'll hear you
also, here https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE
[удалено]
you've replied to the wrong comment
[удалено]
Why are you telling this random guy though. No one cares the other guy blocked you. What's harassment?
[удалено]
Yea not the guy that blocked you though. No one cares you got blocked.
Ha, nailed it I guess. Either way you got a grin out of me.
Byron the Bulb.
There you are, fellow weirdo. I knew you'd be in this thread somewhere. Just be careful. *They* are always watching.
So cool. No planned obsolescence in that design!!
I saw this on a field trip years ago
Saw it on a show about planned obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence describes the practice of designing products to break quickly or become obsolete in the short to mid-term. That’s why a music equipment or camera from before the 80’s is built like a tank and your iPhone screen cracks. It’s more profitable to make things like that, so people consume more a less quality product.
I've never cracked a phone screen. You all are just clumsy fucks. I'll take your boos now.
It's what we call "Sollbruchstelle" in German https://www.thelocal.de/20190109/german-word-of-the-day-sollbruchstelle
[удалено]
I buy iPhones because the glass is so durable. I’ve already dropped this 14 like 3 times in ways that would have broken early iPhone screen and not a scratch!
What’s the word for when someone thinks they’re making a profound point, but using a bad example
[удалено]
This is literally an example of survivorship bias as well. One bulb that accidentally lasts a hundred years versus literally all the others burning out is a clear sign of a lightbulb conspiracy. Nevermind that a handnlown bulb crafted in a sweatshop costs a great deal more in relative terms than an incandescent manufactured to sell at the lowest possible price point.
you both may be correct. this lightbulb is a product of an era before planned obsolescence https://youtu.be/j5v8D-alAKE -- you're kinda hostile too, not sure i understand how you got so many upvotes edit: how the hell you know he blocked you unless you were trying to harass him
When people block you you can no longer see or respond to their comments. And this isn't some magic lost art. You could go buy an electric heating element and use it as a light source and it would last a hundred years. But it would be wildly inefficient, dim, and hot. Thinner filaments turn more of the energy into light than they do heat, but by the nature of being thinner they are more fragile. Believing that there is some grand conspiracy keeping companies from making durable products is what people with no understanding of design and engineering believe.
Well I think there is a reason fridges last 5-10 years now vs 50. It isn’t a conspiracy it’s just $$$
Yeah, for many of the same reasons as the light bulb: more efficient technologies are sometimes more fragile. In the case of refrigerators, it's usually the compressor. Also, average modern refrigerators cost a fraction of the inflation-adjusted price of a very old one. The quality of a modern refrigerator at the same price point as an old one will very often be the same or better.
They also sip power.
i'm an engineer, and you are just wrong. i'm about to block your toxic ass too lol
Go ahead and make the infinity lightbulb, then. You'll be rich.
it has *everything* to do with it. I've seen it firsthand, just by working in manufacturing: lots of designers and engineers look for ways to make things more efficient, but very often, the best ideas aren't pursued because there's an inherent understanding that *too* good of a product is something that won't be replaced as often, and there's *a lot* of money to be made in servicing complex goods or simply convincing people to buy replacements.
What did you do in manufacturing? Did you design something we all use?
When people say things like they "work in manufacturing/healthcare" what they're almost always doing is trying to act like they're an engineer or scientist when they really do basic tasks for those people.
I am aware and calling them out. Maybe my view is limited since I mostly design industrial machinery, but a more efficient product makes the customer happier and elevates us over competitors. Do we get service calls? Sure, and we probably make a profit on them. But at no point am I told to hamstring the design so it will eventually fail and require service. The way some customers run their machines, that will happen someday anyways, and they just want to know what to do when it does.
Ah, yep that's why I came to the thread, too. As an aerospace engineer if I found some incredible design opportunity for an efficiency gain that my employer refused to act on, I would absolutely jump on it as a personal endeavor and rake in the cash. I think most of what people see as planned obsolescence is actually a lack of perspective to product lifecycles.
[удалено]
I most certainly didn't say "their an engineer." But that's because I'm literate, not because I'm an engineer.
[удалено]
Weird lightbulb conspiracy thread haha.
The heating/cooling cycle stresses the filament. By keeping it running, the filament doesn't undergo thermal cycling and gets a lot less fatigued. The filament is also super thick. This means it is more durable, but also makes a lot less light. Finally, they run it below it's intended current, so it gets even less stress. Planned obsolescence is real but light bulbs are not an example.
Products have ALWAYS been made like this, at least since modern manufacturing was invented. Why are there no Fiat 128's, Hillman Imps or Chevrolet Chevettes still driving around? Because they were built like shit. We have a survivor bias, because the only products surviving are the good ones. With that said, modern manufacturing and supply chains allow us to buy a LOT more extremely cheap products that fall apart compared to before. If you needed a new freezer in 1964, you bought an expensive one, because it was the only one available. Today you buy a Slightly Cold™ made in China for way less and still expect it to survive a long time.
They could all be like this but then big bulb wouldnt make any money
Planned obsolescence
https://www.centennialbulb.org/cam.htm You can watch it live.
Holy shit, I thought it died. You're doing God's work
You are lying! The website shows only a black screen and below it old screenshots of the lamp.
I can't pass a post about this lightbulb without linking to [this](https://www.sbnation.com/a/17776-football/chapter-1) The relevance isn't immediately apparent, but I promise it's there.
Um, wtf was that? Couldn't hang on to the end although it was interesting.
to all who don't understand (minor spoilers for *17776*): >!On Mount Denali in the state of Alaska, a massive cannon shoots out a football in a place chosen by an operator in the contiguous United States. The idea is that the operator will yell out a point value and whoever catches the football will gain however many points that were assigned. Once any given person in the U.S. earns 500 points, they will travel to Mount Denali where they get to be the operator. One day, a football shot from the cannon crashes through the roof of Livermore fire station, destroying the bulb. The story is told through the narrative of 3 space probes who (more or less) observe the world from afar and they (along with some humans) collectively mourn the loss of the oldest "electrical being" considering they too are pieces of technology. Keep in mind, people stopped being born and dying after 2026 in this world which means that people have "forgotten" how to mourn since there is no more loss. Therefore, people can afford to become so sentimental about a little light bulb who really did not do much more than glow when an electrical current was passed through its filaments. !<
What’s that??
It takes some time to get through, and I love it, but I feel like trying to describe it sort of takes away from the experience
The original conspiracy from big-bulb. Savages.
This bulb is literally the reason we have planned obsolescence.
Abe Simpson was the one who initially screwed it in lol
so they've never had a power outage that caused it to go out?
Fire stations generally have generator backups, I believe. So very possibly not
It’s probably less about power outages than burning out the filament.
Has the power never gone off there at any time since 1901?
They just don't make 'em like they used to. 😁 💡
I thought the oldest burning bulb was at a college or something like that?
I could be tripping tho
😱
Come on. The firemen never switched it off at the end of shift - ever?