My car magazine arrived in my mailbox yesterday. It was late (usually it shows up at the end of the month) and I was beginning to worry that it wouldn’t come at all. Magazines and newspapers seem to be on the verge of extinction, another victim of our instantaneous world of high technology. A glossy car magazine can’t embed a video of a new automobile racing around the track or carving up curves on a scenic mountain road like their online versions do now. We seem to demand that level of technology these days. We don’t need to read a book if we can see the movie. We can watch news on TV and get any relevant information in a matter of seconds instead of having to read about what someone else observed and get a more complete back story. We don’t need imagination to play games because today’s video game systems render action in real time, full color, high definition, and 3-D action. Watching a car go fast down the road has to be superior to just reading about it, right?
I don’t think it is right at all. If an article is well written, I actually get to experience more of the feeling that driving the car imparts than I would just watching it drive by in a video. An insightful journalist has skills that a mere reporter of an event lacks. It is an important distinction that we are all too willing to toss aside as we rush to implement new features available on our smart phones and electronic tablets. It is also subtracting an important element from the equation: our ability to think and reason, and to exercise our imagination. There is also a simpler reason that I like a nice lightweight glossy magazine over a laptop computer, smart phone, or an electronic tablet: it’s much easier to take with you into the bathroom to read while attending to other business. I think of it as the original version of multitasking, and perhaps the only one worth attempting.
There were several things I noticed as I glanced through this month’s magazine. First of all, it seemed pretty slim. Advertising revenues are what make magazines profitable, and this one has far fewer ads for cars than it used to. In fact, I found something amazing as I leafed through this issue: there were no ads from American (Ford, GM, or Chrysler) car companies. This is a magazine with headquarters near Detroit, Michigan. In fairness, there was an ad from Honda, which despite being a Japanese-owned company, manufactures most of the cars that they sell in the U.S. here in Ohio. I also found out that two popular small cars sold by Ford and Chrysler's Fiat brand are actually assembled in Mexico. So much for “Buy American.”
The second thing in my magazine that interested me was an article about the new LED headlamps that will be used on the next generation S-Class Mercedes-Benz. These headlamps are a technological tour de force, incorporating daytime driving lights, turn indicators, fog lights, high and low beam lights, and cornering illumination in one unit, all while using much less energy than other types of lighting through the exclusive use of light emitting diodes. They also include movable masks, that are computer controlled to avoid blinding the drivers of oncoming vehicles, as well as vehicles being overtaken on the road. The article concluded by saying that vehicles bound for the U.S. market will not have the full range of features because our regulations will not permit them.
For many years, from the 1940’s through the 1980’s, cars on American roads were required by law to use seven inch round sealed beam headlamps. In other parts of the world, lighting was much more varied, and better. In Europe a Mercedes roadster like the one my brother drove was equipped with a stylish unit that incorporated all lighting needs in a single unit on each side of the car. In America, these cars had separated round sealed beam headlights for high and low beams, as well as separate fog lights. I had a Mercedes sedan from 1975 through 1983, and it used four round headlamps that were inserted into rectangular spaces on the front of the car. It also had two rectangular fog lights that hung under the front bumper, and were constantly being damaged by parking lot blocks and other road hazards. In Europe, the rectangular spaces on the front of a similar model car held all lighting, including high and low beams, and fog lights. It was a much more stylish, as well as a much safer solution. In Europe, studies said that their new lighting technology was safer, while studies in this country said that sealed beam headlights were safer, although the truth is probably between these extremes. Likely it depends on who funded the studies in the first place. In any event, U.S. laws have since been amended to permit greater flexibility in lighting design, but we still lag behind the learning curve by not permitting the newest designs, such as Mercedes’ new masked LED lights.
There are many people that decry our country’s extensive and sometimes inane system of over-regulation, claiming that if we could eliminate most of them, our economy would flourish. The free market would be used to determine what is best for everybody. The problem is that the free market wouldn’t stop someone from dumping poison into the air or water because it’s much less expensive than following EPA regulations. The free market allows far too much unscrupulous behavior before it theoretically adjusts to prevent unwanted behavior.
Where does the answer lie? It would be helpful to streamline our regulatory system and eliminate rules that don’t provide benefits, especially in terms of health and safety. But it isn’t really over-regulation by our government that results in economic inefficiency. It is time to use our imagination and our powers of reasoning. Start by enriching yourself by reading some books, then let’s use our empowered brains to elect representatives that will truly represent our interests, not the interests of their sponsoring corporations and special interest groups. In terms that free-market proponents will understand, we need to eliminate the economic incentive that causes our law makers to vote for those things that enrich the small portion of our wealthiest citizens while ignoring benefits for the entire population. Our politicians tell us that they must be masters of multi-tasking, and consider what is best for everyone, but these days it seems that all of their efforts go to protect whatever lobbying group is providing them with the most resources. We need some serious changes to laws regarding campaign financing and lobbying.
Recent behavioral studies have reported several interesting findings. Multitasking really means that you are doing two things at once and both of them poorly. Our smart phones are hindering us from making relevant observations about what is really happening in the world around us. In other words, smart phones are making us dumber. Exercising your brain is the best thing you can do for your health. Let’s all start trying to really think again. We can all imagine a better world than we live in now.
New Mercedes-Benz headlamp
Question: If a person from 1950 were to suddenly appear before you today, what would be the most difficult aspect of modern life to explain?
Answer: I carry in my pocket a device which allows me to instantaneously communicate anywhere in the world, and also offers access to the totality of mankind's knowledge. I use it to view pictures of cute kittens and puppies, and to get into arguments with strangers.
No comments:
Post a Comment