AS so often, we begin with a clarification.
I'm not talking about thick shoes vis-a-vis the stoutness of, say, a brogue.
I'm talking of shoes that don't have a brain. Your own grey matter – located in the head, madam; try giving it a shake – lights up in agitation: shoes don't usually have brains.
Not yet they don't. That's right. They – and I think you know who I mean – are now working on "smart shoes". To be fair, these are not shoes able to debate with you about Hegel. These are shoes that'll tell you when their heel or sole has worn down. Gordon H Bennett. Do we really need this?
When I alluded to "they", you'd be assuming boffins and whatnot, which is broadly speaking correct. But, in particular, we're talking about Apple, the company that brings you expensive computerie gadgets. Not content with filling your pockets with screens, they want to give you shoes that beep or perchance flash a light on your iPhone or iPad. Aye, right.
In its patent application, the Cupertino-based company notes: "When a critical-wear level is reached, even if the shoe looks like it is not particularly worn, the shoe may not provide adequate support and may, in fact, cause damage to feet".
Be still, my damaged feet. I'd never thought of it like that. Using the old-fashioned technology of your eyelobes, you might take a gander at your footwear and detect nothing amiss. But, invisible to the naked eye, they're starting to fall apart, undermining your ankle integrity and critically affecting your usually much admired walking style.
Question: isn't this all going too far? It's all we hear now: smart, smart, smart. Smartphones, watches, televisions and, now, shoes. Tell you what: I'm sticking to good old thick footwear.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article