Morgan did NOT finance the production and marketing of the Edison DC lighting system (which included the light bulb). It was too risky. He only bankrolled the R&D (so that he would own a share if anyone was successful at making a market). Morgan already owned the entrenched and profitable gaslight industry; He didn't need the light bulb.
As for the Masonic connection... I are not one and don't speak with authority, but membership was exceedingly common in those days. I would not make too much of it. Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford and Larry Bird were all Jaycees. Morgan was born very rich, Edison very poor. That probably defines them as much as any one thing.
As for the mercenary nature of Edison's relationship with other wealthy backers/employers... he worked for both Gould (A&P Telegraph) and Western Union, creating competing patents on duplex and quadraplex telegraph technologies. He worked for Morgan to create the lighting system, but financed production himself (in competition with Morgan's gaslight business).
I don't think denigrating Edison's work really makes your argument. I guess because I'm familiar with the prior art (and a lot of other history about Edison that you left out). Those other works were not commercially viable.
Look at the phonograph, the telegraph, and the telephone and tell me he is not a great inventor. Look at his (often mercenary) relationship with industrialist like J.P. Morgan and Jay Gould and tell me his was not fighting on the same side you are fighting on. The underdog.
No he was not a great academic scientist/engineer. It is a familiar meme that academics rarely produce great marketable innovations.
BTW, there are far more DC circuits in the world than there are AC. Edison's arguments against the later for transmission was simply a matter of self interest. As an at-risk entrepreneur, self interest must be respected.
Well... that is fine if you are prepared to return to a simple agrarian economy (Why not? The Amish do it). However, new technology requires raising large sums of money from people capable of assaying its value and more from people willing to share the risks. This is made much more difficult without a banking system.
I do find it ironic however, that we have become a society of managers (paper capital and human capital). We like technology and want technology, but we don't value the engineers and technologists who create it. Outsource that to some poor shlep in India: "I'll own the *Intellectual* property and be rich". Paagh. Lazyness. I think the tech boom created not only tremendous wealth, but tremendous greed and envy. The *managers* envied not what the creators were creating (they could copy that!), they envied what they were earning for creating it. This set in motion the copiers and fraudsters. This latest crisis is a repercussion of failing to better manage our technology economy.
We do need regulations. No doubt about it. Punishments are called for too. This includes reforming the cult of the MBA and the culture of elitism (yes you too mainstream media/politician/etc).
We better get our act together or the system really will fail.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Chuck.
Re: Re: Too bad
Morgan did NOT finance the production and marketing of the Edison DC lighting system (which included the light bulb). It was too risky. He only bankrolled the R&D (so that he would own a share if anyone was successful at making a market). Morgan already owned the entrenched and profitable gaslight industry; He didn't need the light bulb.
As for the Masonic connection... I are not one and don't speak with authority, but membership was exceedingly common in those days. I would not make too much of it. Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford and Larry Bird were all Jaycees. Morgan was born very rich, Edison very poor. That probably defines them as much as any one thing.
As for the mercenary nature of Edison's relationship with other wealthy backers/employers... he worked for both Gould (A&P Telegraph) and Western Union, creating competing patents on duplex and quadraplex telegraph technologies. He worked for Morgan to create the lighting system, but financed production himself (in competition with Morgan's gaslight business).
Great guy Edison.
Too bad
I don't think denigrating Edison's work really makes your argument. I guess because I'm familiar with the prior art (and a lot of other history about Edison that you left out). Those other works were not commercially viable.
Look at the phonograph, the telegraph, and the telephone and tell me he is not a great inventor. Look at his (often mercenary) relationship with industrialist like J.P. Morgan and Jay Gould and tell me his was not fighting on the same side you are fighting on. The underdog.
No he was not a great academic scientist/engineer. It is a familiar meme that academics rarely produce great marketable innovations.
BTW, there are far more DC circuits in the world than there are AC. Edison's arguments against the later for transmission was simply a matter of self interest. As an at-risk entrepreneur, self interest must be respected.
Re: The weakest link fails first . . .
Well... that is fine if you are prepared to return to a simple agrarian economy (Why not? The Amish do it). However, new technology requires raising large sums of money from people capable of assaying its value and more from people willing to share the risks. This is made much more difficult without a banking system.
I do find it ironic however, that we have become a society of managers (paper capital and human capital). We like technology and want technology, but we don't value the engineers and technologists who create it. Outsource that to some poor shlep in India: "I'll own the *Intellectual* property and be rich". Paagh. Lazyness. I think the tech boom created not only tremendous wealth, but tremendous greed and envy. The *managers* envied not what the creators were creating (they could copy that!), they envied what they were earning for creating it. This set in motion the copiers and fraudsters. This latest crisis is a repercussion of failing to better manage our technology economy.
We do need regulations. No doubt about it. Punishments are called for too. This includes reforming the cult of the MBA and the culture of elitism (yes you too mainstream media/politician/etc).
We better get our act together or the system really will fail.