> Hm, I disagree. ...
> *Some* systems are better as simple mechanical devices, but I'd put that number at a very, very low percentage.
We actually agree. Yes the number of cases is small (hence my wording "non-zero"). ;-)
I warned everyone I was making a minor point about "subtle cases," right? Both you and eternityforest thought I needed "correction" and pointed out it was a small number of cases, but I already agree. My reasoning process was the same as both of yours, and I came the same conclusion.
But while it's not many cases, we still shouldn't forget it. Imprecise thinking is the mind killer.
If a designer categorically decides (to save time) that we humans should never again revert anything (presumably, that has ever been done electronically, by anyone) back to a mechanical solution, they'll produce a worse solution in certain cases. Probably a lot of cases, actually!
One may counter, "I don't mean anything that's ever been done electronically by anyone, just the ones where electronics are better", but how do we distinguish the two, beyond in obvious cases? Worse yet, if we need to do that analysis anyway, what brainpower is being saved by having a rule to never switch away from electronics? :-\
TL;DR we should resist the temptation to shortcut with a simplifying rule "thou shalt not switch electronics to mechanics", because it neither rules nor simplifies!
I warned everyone I was making a minor point about "subtle cases," right? Both you and eternityforest thought I needed "correction" and pointed out it was a small number of cases, but I already agree. My reasoning process was the same as both of yours, and I came the same conclusion.
But while it's not many cases, we still shouldn't forget it. Imprecise thinking is the mind killer.
If a designer categorically decides (to save time) that we humans should never again revert anything (presumably, that has ever been done electronically, by anyone) back to a mechanical solution, they'll produce a worse solution in certain cases. Probably a lot of cases, actually!
One may counter, "I don't mean anything that's ever been done electronically by anyone, just the ones where electronics are better", but how do we distinguish the two, beyond in obvious cases? Worse yet, if we need to do that analysis anyway, what brainpower is being saved by having a rule to never switch away from electronics? :-\
TL;DR we should resist the temptation to shortcut with a simplifying rule "thou shalt not switch electronics to mechanics", because it neither rules nor simplifies!