[PREV - KRUGMAN_INCLINED]    [TOP]

PEDDLING_PROPERITY


                                               February 5, 2010
Paul Krugman, in
"Peddling Prosperity" (1994)

He titled Chapter 9 "The Economics of QWERTY".
Here, he discusses the work of Paul David and
Brian Arthur from 1982, using the supposed
industry lock-in on the Qwerty keyboards as
an example of "path dependence".

These days, the supposed efficiency of the
Dvorak keyboard over the Qwerty is regarded
as something of a myth (or at least, as            Hm... actually, I *was*
something that's not that well established...      convinced it was myth.
apparently the studies showing the advantages      Now that Posner is
were not exactly *independant* studies).           telling me it's a myth,
                                                   I feel the need to
   "What Paul David, Brian Arthur,                 double-check that.
   and a growing number of other
   economists began to recognize in                   I wasn't aware that
   the late seventies and early                       there were ideological
   eighties was that stories like that                axes grinding on the
   of the typewriter keyboard are,                    edges of this subject.
   in fact, pervasive in the economy.
   Some of these stories involve                      KEY_ISSUE
   technology choices that bear an obvious
   resemblence to the QWERTY tale."

      Krugman goes on to cite VHS (yawn),
      software choices, etc.

 The point to take away here, is that
 Paul Krugman does not place "enormous
 weight" on the QWERTY example, he's
 just using it as a colorful,
 convienient name for the phenomena,         We tend to talk about the
 which right or wrong happened to            "first mover advantage" in
 be standard in the field.                   the software business. This
                                             is hardly controversial.

     There are reasons *some* people might                The whole idea
     be inclined to take exception to discussion...       that "history
                                                          matters" is
     "What conservatives believe in, above all,           stunningly obvious
     is the effectiveness of free markets as ways         to anyone who
     to organize economic activity.  Leave people         isn't a market
     free to make their own, individual choices,          fundamentalist:
     say conservatives, and they will be far more
     productive and efficient than if you try to            No, Virginia,
     plan or direct their activities.  ...                  efficiency does
     But what if the collective result of those             not always win
     free choices is to lock in a bad result?               out.
     ... the story of the QWERTY keyboard is not
     just a cute piece of trivia ... it is a                The invisible
     parable that opens our eyes to a whole                 hand is not
     different way of thinking about                        an omnipotent
     economics  ... that rejects the idea that              hand.
     markets invariably lead the economy to a
     unique best solution; instead, it asserts
     that the outcome of market competition often
     depends crucially on historical accident."



     "Silicon Valley is where it is
     because of the vision of Frederick
     Terman, vice-president of Stanford,
     in supporting a few high-tech
     entrepreneurs in the 1940s, forming        At a guess, you can go still
     the seed around which the famous           farther than that...  my
     high-tech concentration crystalized."      impression is other things
                                                were involved, like the
                                                importance of radar in World
                                                War II.  Without that,
                                                Stanford might not have
                                                mattered so much.


   Posner's grand accusation on this point,
   even if it's correct, is that Krugman
   missed a *single* paper published in
   1990 (a few years before Krugman could
   have been working on this book, which
   came out in 1994):

       S.J. Liebowitz and Steven E. Margolis,
       "The Fable of the Keys,"                          Note that
       33 Journal of Law and Economics 1 (1990)          "Law and Economics"
       [ref]      is Posner's beat,
                                                         not Krugman's.
                                                         Why would Krugman
                  KEY_ISSUE                              follow this
                                                         particular journal?


--------
[NEXT - KEY_ISSUE]