Interesting Links for 10-02-2017

[andrewducker]

The Real Fight...Starts Now (Hilarious take on Corbyn) (tags: politics satire ) We know what will make us happy, why do we watch TV instead? (tags: happiness psychology tv ) Netflix Castlevania series penned by Warren Ellis (tags: tv games netflix ) Scotland is retraining Syrian refugee doctors to work for the NHS (tags: syria nhs refugee

Comments

[danieldwilliam]

There are a whole bunch of rules on how long you have to age named spirits in order for them to be official. Brandy; two years. Whisky; three years. Gin; a small splash of tonic.

So until you get the law changed the ultrasound business doesn't help you qualify for the valuable status of brandy or whisky or whatever any quicker - but what it might do, if the process is not expensive is let your 3 year old whisky taste like a six year old whisky and let you get well received tasty products to market more quickly. Which might have a cashflow and working capital advantage.

[nancylebov]

I wonder whether a home ultrasound liquor-ager could be made cheaply enough. How about one that's cheap enough to be owned by a small business?

[danieldwilliam]

From memory small medical ultrasound machines are not that expensive.

[andrewducker]

Also, what it might do is allow people to sell Whiskish for half the price of Whisky, and everyone who isn't a snob to start drinking that instead.

[danieldwilliam]

They are quality standards not just status signalling.

[andrewducker]

"How long you age something" isn't a quality standard. "What is tastes like" is a quality standard. If you can achieve the same taste without spending two years aging, then the differences are pure status signalling.

[danieldwilliam]

I think not quite. It's more an ISO9001 thing than a liking the taste thing

[andrewducker]

My point is that those things (the barley, water, etc) aren't actually the quality of the finished good. The contents of that good is its quality. If you're demanding something about its production or the way it's served, then that's pure social signalling/snobbery - you're not caring about the product itself, but about things that are utterly unrelated to that product. (Provided that both methods of producing the product produce the exact same product)

[danieldwilliam]

Depends if one cares about the other components the output. Is the fair trade quality of Green & Black chocolate part of the output or  (just) social signalling.  What about me desire to support large amounts of variety in the beer market by preferring craft beer because I like there being choice and innovation and novelty?

"If" is doing a goodly amount of quality assurance. I think QA processes are generally important for reasons of actual output quality and the value of the assurance part.

[andrewducker]

But in this case neither of those things apply.

I totally agree that fair-trade, or buying local, or making sure that there's no arsenic in your alcohol are valid things to want. But "made in the way that takes longer, but has no side-effects or affects on the actual outcome" doesn't seem like any of those to me.

[danieldwilliam]

I think it still depends on what one means by the actual outcome. We're operating in n-dimensional product space here