• How about a new name for ‘smart’ meters? • Do the path math • On technology and jobs • At the airport How about a new name for ‘smart’ meters? There are numerous types of meters, from parking meters,
• How about a new name for ‘smart’ meters? • Do the path math •
On technology and jobs • At the airport
How about a new name for ‘smart’ meters?
There are numerous types of meters, from parking meters, water meters, taxi meters, light meters, music meters, gas meters and barometers to thermometers. The list is endless.
The newest meter that seems to have everyone up in arms is called a “smart meter.” Why should people be up in arms about a meter that is smart?
It’s all in the name. The electric company needs to rename the smart meter, something that is not so intimidating,
I can understand if people were protesting dumb meters, or stupid meters, but why the controversial over something smart?
The controversy is because we feel intimidated by something called smart. Now imagine if the electric company had called these “dakine meters,” or “saving money meters,” or even “‘ohana- meters?”
I have a motion to rename smart meters dakine meters.
My guess is nobody would protest dakine meters, because dakine meter is not intimidating, it is dakine!
Do I hear a second?
James “Kimo” Rosen, Kapa‘a
Do the path math
In the Jan.14 edition of The Garden Island was a story about the bike path.
It had two conflicting messages that were the whole story. First is that the Anahola community does not want the path, then they do, hmm.
The other is what disturbs me the most — the math that was used to project the real costs to complete this path.
The numbers used in the story show the path has cost $4,441,176 per mile, and the estimated 23.8 miles would cost a total of $53.25 million.
Well, the math says it will cost at least $105.7 million. I know all those long numbers are hard to read.
Who is really paying that money? It is all of us … for a path that will be destroyed in the next hurricane. What a waste.
John Robinson, Kalaheo
On technology and jobs
In his letter, “Technology, jobs and business economics” (Letters: Jan. 15), Mr. Schaefer challenged readers to consider that: “Anything that takes a job away from a human being is the enemy of all, including the very business promoting it.”
When viewed in the context of the immediate present, such occurrences appear to be the “enemy of all.” However, when considered in the context of the many years of human history, a much larger issue is highlighted — they could be the “ally of all.”
Throughout our history we have been engaged in the research and development of tools and techniques that assist us in doing (accomplishing) and getting (gaining access to) progressively more of the basic essentials in life such as food, clothing, shelter and health care.
With this assistance, we have increased our standard of living while decreasing the time and effort required to do so.
There is an old saying: “If we continue doing and getting more with less, we could eventually do and get everything with nothing.”
The beneficial consequences of this inventiveness include increased population growth, a longer life span, more leisure time, plus other products for improving our living standards.
Another consequence is increasing unemployment, which can be viewed as either an “enemy” or an “ally.”
Hunters and gatherers lost their jobs to shepherds and ranchers, who lost their jobs to farmers, who lost their jobs to slaves, who lost their jobs to machines operated by paid slaves/employees, who lost their enslaving jobs to electronics (e.g., “self check-outs”), who are losing their jobs to computers, fiber optics, lasers, light waves, etc.
We now have the time, tools, technologies and talent capable of providing basic essentials for every human being on our planet.
However, we have not yet been able to conceive of a life-enhancing way to invest our potential unemployment.
The best we have been able to come up with is the invention of an economy (and employment) based on the production, distribution, and consumption of non-essentials, supported by a financial industry whose only objective is financial profit to pay for more luxurious non-essentials.
Trillions of dollars are spent each year on sports, booze, body-beautifying, pets, hobbies, toys and a host of other time, talent and technology-consuming, boredom-relieving, socially-sanctioned, systematized irrelevancies and ego-comforting non-essentials.
That economy is now collapsing. So what’s next? There is another old saying: “Problems cannot be solved with the thinking that creates them.” We can take our cue from a property found in all complex systems throughout our universe, from quarks to quasars and beyond.
The science of complexity suggests that all complex systems get their act together, developing a surplus that is invested in the formation of a more inclusive system that transcends, includes and transforms all of its individual parts.
Robert P. Merkle, Koloa
At the airport
A while back I had an airport security guard approach me and inform me my safety sticker was out of date.
After thanking him and looking carefully at his uniform, I politely asked him what concern that was to him, wherupon he gave me a look and strode off.
Ray Smith, Lihu‘e
