

Darpa wants to refactor US manufacturing - mnemonicsloth
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/01/darpa-works-on-reinventing-all-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

======
roc
I'm consistently surprised that people are still arguing against progress in
favor of jobs protectionism. It's never worked. All we accomplished through
the 80s was propping up our unhealthy Steel and Auto industries and
compounding the pain.

If we aren't ready for the design-centric, automated-manufacturing future,
then not only will the linesmen be out of jobs but the designers, engineers
and roboticists that we _didn't_ train and lay the ground work for, will be
out of jobs.

~~~
ibsulon
1\. Designers, engineers, and roboticists aren't usually the types taking
manufacturing jobs except to find ways to improve the process.

2\. Many and dare I say most people in manufacturing are people without the
inclination or talen to be designers, engineers, and roboticists. The more we
automate, the more we will struggle to find productive roles for these people.

3\. That said, it's still cheaper to stick a third world body on a project
than a robot, and until we've raised the world's standard of living this is
going to continue.

~~~
dantheman
Your point #3 is incorrect if in a lot of situations, especially ones in which
transportation and time play a factor -- for on demand production with minimal
inventories.

And second, he was saying by not automating and improving we would never have
the jobs (develop the talent and abilitiy) to have the roboticists when we
need them.

------
tron_carter
From the article:"When you lower the barrier for people to prototype, and for
people to become part of the manufacturing and design process, you go from
tens or hundreds of people to tens of thousands of people who can take part" A
way to further decentralize manufacturing and encourage cheap prototyping
would be to embrace 3d printer technology advances and reductions in cost.

------
sophacles
It was always a dream of mine to have a little company that designed small
gadgets, party favor type toys, doodads and so on. The problem comes down to
tooling. It would be much more fun to just send off a cad file to some place
and set up a contract with some logistics company, and bam! New product.

A similar idea, and its ramifications, is the central theme of Cory Doctrow's
newest work: Makers.

------
hristov
Is this really any of DARPA's business? Aren't they supposed to be a defence
research agency? When did they start feeling responsible for the US
manufacturing economy. And why do they think they have the sufficient
knowledge and ability to reform the US economy?

I mean if those manufacturing methods were more efficient, then wouldn't the
economy change by itself then?

~~~
anigbrowl
GTFO my ARPAnet, then. Seriously, DARPA has always invested blue-sky
technology with the aim of securing a long-term strategic advantage for the
US.

Just think of the impact (ie cost savings) that a general-purpose
manufacturing infrastructure could have for defense procurement, never mind
the wider world of business. I see significant strategic value in this, and
think DARPA has more than justified its existence as an incubator for new
technology rather than being a subsidy dump.

------
kingkongreveng_
Tax rates and government interventionism are major forces driving business
overseas. A government "five year plan" to "refactor" the manufacturing
industry is the poison not the medicine.

~~~
hristov
Nope, labor costs are the major forces. As long as somebody sells the stuff in
america they will probably pay very similar taxes based on profit regardless
of where they made it. They will probably pay more taxes if they outsource
actually because that would bring them more profit.

~~~
kingkongreveng_
Labor costs are lower in much of Asia, but it's not that simple. Shipping
costs, risks to IP, loss of flexibility and accessibility to the manufacturing
operation all factor into the picture. There are plenty of examples of
manufacturing operations returning to the US for these reasons. Germany is a
higher cost labor market than the US yet you don't see much of this simplistic
scenario where physical operations inevitably flee high wages.

The big issue driving away these operations on net is the regulatory nightmare
of employing Americans and running a plant. You have OSHA, the EPA, and an
ever growing body of employer mandates to contend with. Also, the US is now a
high tax country from a business perspective.

~~~
hristov
Germany has their own versions of the EPA and OSHA and they are much more
powerful than the US ones.

~~~
eande
which is tax money and they tax the society enormously , e.g. sales tax alone
19%. DARPA called in the past for some great technical innovations, but this
one bringing manufacturing back to US is questionable. Not that I don’t like
to see it, but it is an open worldwide market and may the best business model
win. I see this initiate more a reaction from the government, because they are
scared loosing the access to the companies who run the semi fab process.

