Forgot your password?
Cyhist Apr 1 1997 A
Document Actions
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 05:57:25 GMT
Reply-To: kob1@ix.netcom.com
Sender: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> From: "Kevin B. O'Brien" <kob1@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Papoon for President
Subject: CM>Re: Computer history is on the wrong track
In-Reply-To: <199703202137.NAA08793@ixmail1.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
______________________________________________________________________
Community Memory: Discussion List on the History of Cyberspace ______________________________________________________________________
On Thu, 20 Mar 1997 11:52:27 -0800, Jay Hosler <jhosler@CISCO.COM> wrote:
>My question is: why, in the face of this enormous phenomenon we're all =
part of,
>do our history books and courses concentrate almost exclusively on =
technology?
>We're spending so much of our energy documenting the details of the =
orchestra
>that we're missing the music.
I would imagine that it is because they are written more by technologists than by social scientists. This does not in any way invalidate the technological history, but there are many more histories that could be written. One could write an economic history of computing, for instance, that would focus on the cost/benefit calculus of DP in large firms. One could write a legal history that would focus on the legal issues raised by computer technology, for instance privacy. One could write a military history that would focus on how computer technology has changed warfare. And so on. The point is that there are not just two ways to do history, but an infinite number of ways to do history, depending on the questions you want to ask.
______________________________________________________________________
Reply-To: kob1@ix.netcom.com
Sender: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> From: "Kevin B. O'Brien" <kob1@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Papoon for President
Subject: CM>Re: Computer history is on the wrong track
In-Reply-To: <199703202137.NAA08793@ixmail1.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
______________________________________________________________________
Community Memory: Discussion List on the History of Cyberspace ______________________________________________________________________
On Thu, 20 Mar 1997 11:52:27 -0800, Jay Hosler <jhosler@CISCO.COM> wrote:
>My question is: why, in the face of this enormous phenomenon we're all =
part of,
>do our history books and courses concentrate almost exclusively on =
technology?
>We're spending so much of our energy documenting the details of the =
orchestra
>that we're missing the music.
I would imagine that it is because they are written more by technologists than by social scientists. This does not in any way invalidate the technological history, but there are many more histories that could be written. One could write an economic history of computing, for instance, that would focus on the cost/benefit calculus of DP in large firms. One could write a legal history that would focus on the legal issues raised by computer technology, for instance privacy. One could write a military history that would focus on how computer technology has changed warfare. And so on. The point is that there are not just two ways to do history, but an infinite number of ways to do history, depending on the questions you want to ask.
______________________________________________________________________
