Simple technological lines lead to dead ends
#geostrategy
A few months ago(rus), we discussed in detail the differences between the division of labor and the deepening of labor (i.e. intensification and optimization of technological chain)/the division of knowledge. Surprisingly, many modern economists do not distinguish these concepts and combine them. Therefore, they cannot recognize and describe the principles of building a post-capitalist economy, in which the factor of volume expansion division is reduced and the principle of labor deepening dominates.

Let's look at an example of almost purely traditional and understandable division of labor, a sort of Adam Smith's "Pin factory" on a global scale – the microelectronics industry, which has developed over the past two decades entirely by the methods of division of labor, isolation, and pushing the existing technological stages to their physical limits. The result has been a unique industry consisting of many local monopolists around the globe, with a consumer market of at least 500 million industrial consumers required to maintain current price levels. If we try to localize microelectronics in Russia, spending 3-4 trillion dollars, we will get a price level 7-8 times higher than the current one. For the USA, this indicator will be twice as high.

In the development we have taken the easiest way, increasing the length of technological chains,which is equivalent to increasing the size of the sales market. However, further development is impossible even without the global catastrophe, because we have almost reached physical limits and thresholds. A couple more phases of development and we will be limited by the laws of quantum effects which is a dead end of the current technological pathway.

A very different example is a hypersonic technology based on the principles of division of labor and deepening of knowledge. In order to achieve the desired effect, the number of missiles needed has been reduced by two orders of magnitude (by 100 times). We have already mentioned that the threat posed by an aircraft carrier, a cruiser or a frigate can now be eliminated by a single hypersonic missile. Recently, a new Sarmat(rus) intercontinental ballistic missile, also known as "Satan II", has been tested. The entry into service of this missile has reduced the number of missiles needed to destroy the military technological potential of the United States and the EU by the same two orders of magnitude. How much has the new approach increased the length of the technological chains? What do you think about this?

I suppose that in 7-10 years against the background of the collapsing global world and in an attempt to localize, Russia will be able to significantly reduce and simplify the technological set of microelectronics, moving away from the required number of 500 million industrial consumers. The main point is that there should be such a task and we will not simply copy the technologies.

And yeah, under the circumstances of the global catastrophe, a bunch of small satellites distributing the Internet sounds nice, but a few missiles capable of destroying the enemy and weapons capable of shooting down other people's satellites, in addition to being supplied for export, is a strategically correct choice, acting in the long term…😁😁😁

The Russian version can be found here