The three readings: As We May Think (V. Bush, 1945), The Computer as a Communication Device (J.C.R. Licklidder, 1968), and Technology as Systems, Controls and Information (T.P. Hughes, 2004) span almost 60 years of technological visions and changes. In each article, the authors speak of technology as a means to improve the human condition. But is this really true? Have the technologies that have been hinted at and described in these articles really the panacea for all our ills? I feel that Bush, Licklidder and Hughes honestly believe technology is the answer but there is evidence in their writings that this is not necessarily true.
In his opening paragraph, Bush states that scientists, “Have shared greatly and learned much.” (Bush, 1945, p 1.). He then goes on to say that, “Man’s use of science and of the new instruments have increased his control of his material environment… improved his food, his clothing his shelter…increased his security and released him partly from the bondage of bare existence.” (Bush, 1945, p 1.). However, even with centuries of scientific improvement, in 1945 when this article was written, Bush claims that the, “Investigator is staggered by the findings and conclusions… conclusions which he cannot find time to grasp, much less to remember.” (Bush, 1945, p. 2.). Bush does not look to his present, 1945, but to the future for redemption. “It may be striking to outline the instrumentalities of the future more spectacularly, rather than to stick closely to methods and elements now known.” (Bush, 1945, p. 12.)
Licklidder, some 23 years later, stated in his 1968 article that the programmed digital computer, a concept outlined in Bush’s article, “Can change the nature and value of communication even more profoundly than did the printing press and the picture tube.” (Licklidder, 1968, p. 22.). He stated that an interconnected network of computers, a precursory description of the World Wide Web, would make life, “Happier for the on-line individual… communication will be more effective and productive, and therefore more enjoyable.” (Licklidder, 1968, p. 40.). Licklidder follows this very statement with the question of accessibility. Will an internet benefit society if not everyone has access? “For the society, the impact will be good or bad, depending mainly on the question: Will ‘to be on line’ be a privilege or a right…if all minds should prove to be responsive, surely the boon to humankind would be beyond measure.” (Licklidder, 1968, p. 40.). Like Bush, Licklidder looks to the future for answers.
In Hughes article, Technology as Systems, Controls, and Information, “Large-scale complexity characterized the post-World War II era of technological systems…Because of this complexity, the control or management of technological systems becomes a major problem for engineers and other expert professionals.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 1.). Hughes reports that “Russell Ackoff… provocative thinker in the field of operations research and systems dynamics—became an insightful interpreter of the systems era.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 78.). Hughes goes on top paraphrase Todd La Porte and Russell Ackoff’s research by stating, “Laporte’s insights help explain why Ackoff referred to systems management as mess management.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 79.).
In the late 1960s, 1970s and into the 1980s, the technological advances of post-World War II era created a disconnect with society, who was struggling to cope. Hughes quotes from Elting Morison’s Men, Machines, and Modern Times (1966) that systems, “Have acquired an intricacy, mass, scale, and rate of change making it extremely difficult for individuals to cope.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 88.). Hughes reinforces that claim by referring to Lewis Mumford’s work, stating, “Megasystems…deadened the humanistic aspects of life and took society to the brink of catastrophe.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 88.). In the closing pages of Hughes’ article, he concludes that, “Information-age enthusiasts… fervently believe that computer-driven technology will change everything.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 105.). “Bill Gates, the head of the software giant Microsoft Corporation, touts the bright future of the information revolution. In the Road Ahead (1995), he [Bill Gates] shares his vision of a future for which, he says, he can hardly wait.” (Hughes, 2004, p. 107.).
In each era, from post-World War II to 2004 and beyond, scientists and researchers have looked to future technology to help relive burdens in our every day lives. It seems to me that we discover or invent a technology to help expedite mundane tasks or help expedite the method of processing these tasks. As tasks have gotten easier, we have been given more tasks to complete. As electronic communication, such as the personal computer, cell phones, and the World Wide Web have advanced, so has the intrusion into our personal lives. For many people, there is not line drawn between work- time and home-time. We enjoy instant access to a whole cornucopia of information; however, we also position ourselves as being instantly accessible, and at all the times. As I’ve tried to illustrate with excerpts from the articles by Bush, Licklidder, and Hughes, we just seem to be inventing technology to help us cope with the side effects of previously invented technology, such as, “Jobs that may be lost to computerized automation, loss of individual privacy, and a disenfranchised population. (Hughes, 2004, p. 108.).
