Aucbvax.6000
fa.space
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space
Sat Jan 30 03:53:48 1982
SPACE Digest V2 #92
>From OTA@S1-A Sat Jan 30 03:46:29 1982
SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 92
Today's Topics:
HUMANISTS AND TECHNOLOGISTS
Technologists and Humanists
Government funded research
Technologists "vs." Humanists
Government Funding of Exploration
"humanists" and "technologists" NOT disjoint sets!
Re: Government Funding of Space
Re: Technologists and Humanists
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 January 1982 07:24-EST
From: Steve Kudlak <FFM MIT-MC AT>
Subject: HUMANISTS AND TECHNOLOGISTS
To: SPACE at MIT-MC
Actually, I honestly can't see what humanists and
technologists fight over so much. Both want to see
the world changed for the better.
Humanists(philospher's artists writers etc) infleuence
the world more indirectly but they do exert, in my
view a considerable influence. By pointing out things
they see in the world and how they feel about it
artists and writers definitely influence the social
climate that the technologist types work in and the
like. Technology types that I have known have been seriously
influenced by "works of art" especially literature
and this causes them to do things differently than
they would if they were not so influenced.
Technology types do things that at thier best give power
to people. Like the power to express my ideas to many
people in many different areas quickly. Most technology
types are not cold, crass individuals at all, and 99%
of them bleed if you prick them.
The problem is dealing with stereotypes of what
artists and technologists are like. These stereotypes
are usually quite funny. I STILL MEET PEOPLE WHO THINK
THAT COMPUTER HACKERS TALK IN A DULL MONOTONE VOICE LIKE
ROBOTS IN SOME OLD MONSTER MOVIE.
Once upon a time science, technology and art were not
considered mutually exclusive realms. It would be nice
if we could recapture some of that rather than fighting about
which is 'better' and 'more useful'.
Have fun
Sends Steve
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jan 1982 0842-PST
From: Tom Wadlow <TAW AT S1-A>
Subject: Technologists and Humanists
To: space at MIT-MC
Having met quite a few people in both the Arts and the Sciences, (I am
an engineer myself) I have noticed that there seem to be far more
technologists influenced by art, or even active participants in artistic
endeavours, than vice versa. Many of the technologists I have known
embrace art and see it in their work, while the artists (actors, literary
types, film types) I have met seem to be afraid of, or claim to despise
technology. This is, of course, not a general rule. But it is far
too common to be comfortable with.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jan 1982 1317-EST
From: MPH at MIT-XX
Subject: Government funded research
To: space at mc
To those who question the usefulness of government funded research, I would
like to point out that the electronic digital computer, as we now know it,
was originally developed by research funded directly by the U.S.
government (e.g. ENIAC, EDVAC) and by the British government (e.g.
EDSAC). It took commercial development to make the computer ubiquitous;
however, it seems quite implausible that any responsible profit-making
enterprise would have undertaken computer research and development in the
late 1940's without the foundation laid by the government projects. For
instance, the very first commercial computer company (the Electronic
Control Company, 1946) was founded by the leaders of the ENIAC project on
the basis of the ENIAC patents. Even with this head start, it had severe
cash flow problems, and survived only by being bought out by a larger
company.
"It is a noteworthy feature of our American system that much of the
computer field owes its existence to the generosity of our government in
giving to its employees and university contractors the rights to
*inventions made with government funds*" H.H. Goldstine, The Computer from
Pascal to von Neumann, p 71 (my emphasis).
-------
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jan 1982 1127-CST
From: Jonathan Slocum <LRC.SLOCUM AT UTEXAS-20>
Subject: Technologists "vs." Humanists
To: space at MIT-AI
First of all, I would lump myself in with the "Technologists" w.r.t.
life goals and modus operandi. However, the statement about "nothing
of significance being accomplished by `humanists'" cannot go unchallenged.
I will simply point to one of the more spectacular existence proofs:
amongst the various Nobel prizes for what amount to technologists, there
is tucked away an item known as the Nobel Peace Prize. I shall leave
the reader to fill in the details. 'Nuff said?
Now maybe we can go back to talking about Space??
-------
------------------------------
Date: Fri Jan 29 18:52:55 1982
To: Space@MIT-MC
From: ucbvax!decvax!watmath!pcmcgeer@Berkeley
Subject: Government Funding of Exploration
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
capitalists haven't ever been able to explore new frontiers without some
government assistance. Even the enthusiastically laissez-faire 19th
Century British governments supported financially and legally extraterritorial
firms. A classic example is the East India Company, and, as jcwinterton
pointed out, the Hudson's Bay Company.
The anti-space enthusiasts may have a point, though. Contrary to
popular leftist belief, an Empire doesn't usually materially benefit the
Imperial nation. Britain bled itself white subsidizing Canada, Australia,
India and South Africa, and didn't exactly make a killing on the American
colonies. Space will, one suspects, ultimately be of tremendous benefit to
the human race - but that portion of it that remains on Terra herself may
not be the principal beneficiaries.
Oh, well, with any luck, the only people on Earth by 2200 will all be
amed Proxmire - and their heads firmly rooted in the sand.
Cheers,
Rick.
------------------------------
Date: Fri Jan 29 10:32:47 1982
To: Space@MIT-MC
From: ucbvax!mhtsa!harpo!floyd!houxi!ihnss!ihps3!pcl@Berkeley
Subject: "humanists" and "technologists" NOT disjoint sets!
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
welfare" [Random House College Dictionary]
I take strong exception to the sharp dichotomy watmath!pcmcgeer assumes
between humanists and technologists! I consider myself to be both, and
see many others here at work and on these nets (Usenet & ARPAnet) who I
would describe similarly. And it's not just that I'm a technologist while
sitting at my desk, and a humanist when considering the best remedy to living
in an unratified state - we can be both at the same time! Of course, *some*
*activities* may fall into just one category or the other, and it is
(unfortunately) possible to find some technologists who are clearly not
humanists.
On the point pcmcgeer was addressing, I think it is those of us who
are *more* than just technologists who are in a position to affect society
the most. The technology by itself doesn't tell you how to get it out
of the lab, where to put it, how to use it, or even WHY ANYONE SHOULD
BOTHER!
This point applies to more than just the topic of this news group/digest,
and should probably be in HUMAN-NETS, but it does seem to have some
connection to the 'popular' argument against funding for space ("Why not
spend all that money on something that will benefit the masses?"). If
ALL we are is technologists, or even if that's how the 'public'
perceives us (and we perceive ourselves), we won't be able to refute that
argument effectively.
Paul Lustgarten
Bell Labs - Indian Hill
------------------------------
Date: Fri Jan 29 14:23:00 1982
To: Space@MIT-MC
From: ucbvax!decvax!watmath!jcwinterton@Berkeley
Subject: Re: Government Funding of Space
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
small-companies-are-good), we get the problem that no private organization
is big enough to finance space exploration and research. In the last big
exploratory push, things were financed by people who had every right to
expect profits from the ventures. Some of the funding organizations
were governments but not in the sense of governments today. The king of
Spain financed Columbus for profit (territory, resources) and the
Company of Gentleman Trading our of Hudson's Bay had exactly the same
motive. Because of our *advanced* technology, we are now able to explore
beyond the boundaries of our present space conveyance, and to venture
into the next ocean. We have even managed to explore, briefly, the next
island. Now, if a PRIVATE consortium of investors could be LEGALLY
brought together, I wonder if we wouldn't be a lot further than we are?
Present governments tend to be monolithic and conservative to the point
where they timidly take mousy-steps where giant-steps are needed. Mind you,
to take giant-step you have to take RISKS! Not only do you have to risk
money, you have to risk LIVES. We honor those pioneers who gave their
lives in settling our continent and romanticize about them greatly. Life
wasn't regarded as cheap in those days, no matter what you may read. Realism
simply demanded the risks be taken. The population pressure was the cause.
We are coming to the same pressure levels in the global village. If there
are too many of us here, we will have to go there. If some go there for
breathing room, others will follow to get thinking room too. History does
repeat, but with some skewing. The present skew seems to have to do with
bureaucratic inertial and general tail covering. Grrrrr.
------------------------------
Date: Fri Jan 29 21:35:00 1982
To: Space@MIT-MC
From: ucbvax!ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!duke!decvax!watmath!jcwinterton@Berkeley
Subject: Re: Technologists and Humanists
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
I expect that this is due to the feeling that there must be more to living
than hacking away at some scientific persuit, eating, sleeping, having kids,
etc. People in the arts already know this, and probably have no inclination
to seek other horizons to expand because of the diversity that they already
have.
How many technologists do you know that have embraced other technologies
than their own on a *for interest* basis? I can think of very few....
------------------------------
End of SPACE Digest
*******************
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
