The blue LED was supposed to be impossible—until a young engineer proposed a moonshot idea.

  • sebinspace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Really annoying that the company shat on him for years, and continued to do so after he multiplied the value of the company. Toxic behavior.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s an extreme example that perfectly illustrates how profit is extracted from employees by the employers. He didn’t have any leverage to get a larger share of the profit from his labor, as is the case with most employees. You could call it toxic behavior, and it is, but it’s the expected behavior, the behavior incentivised by the system.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        It also shows how capitalism hinder innovation. It doesn’t create it. The potentially innovative path took money without any guarantee of creating profit. It’s bad business to be innovative. Capitalism prioritizing profit never chooses the best path, even if it gets a good ending eventually despite itself.

        • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I’m not sure how you come to this conclusion. For every example of a capitalist avoiding risky investments, there are 100 capitalists betting on the next innovation.

          Venture capital. Heard the term? AI, Metaverse, crypto, web 2.0, .com… The tech space alone is full of capital making (stupidly risky) bets. They also make good bets too, like PC, search engines, online shopping (oh, look how the tech giants came to be).

          I get it, capitalism bad. But this is just a nonsensical argument.

          • muix@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            I was working for a place that was the market leader in a certain niche of simulation software. Their simulation was about 10x more efficient than their competitors. However, that version of the software is strictly off limits for the public, and made a version which they sold with a sleep statement so that it was only 1.1x faster than the next best solution. That way they could remain market leaders any time the competitors released a better version. Even though many systems rely on growing simulations to simulate bigger scenarios that could help save lives.

            Just an example of capitalism impeding progress.

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    My favorite thing about widely-available blue LEDs was the effect on TV scifi.

    Watch the Star Trek shows made in the 1980s and 1990s and the tricorders, alien gadgets, and other props were always twinkling with red, yellow, and green LEDs to look futuristic. A generation later and every single hand prop on 2000s Doctor Who, Torchwood, etc. glowed and twinkled blue because the LEDs had just become cheap enough for prop makers, but weren’t yet widespread in day-to-day life so the viewers were seeing something strange and unusual.

    Now every color of LED imaginable is just common and whatever, but for a good stretch of time glowy blue became the standard “scifi” color just because that particular tech happened to turn up at that particular time.

  • Clent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Excellent counter example to anyone claiming that we need patent and copyright to innovate.

    This man made nothing on his invention and was not motivated by money but fame.

    There are endless of examples of how those who do things for money hold back the creativity that leads to innovation. This is one of them. It almost didn’t happen because his pursuit was not seen as profitable.