taylor@hpdstma.hp.com (Dave Taylor) (07/22/88)
___________________________________________________________________________ | | | Computers & Sunday, July 10, 1988 | | Society Volume 3 | | Digest Number 18 | | | | Editor and Publisher: Dave Taylor, Hewlett-Packard Company | |___________________________________________________________________________| Contents: Positional Textual References ................................... Tom Benson Computers, Chemistry and Society ........................... William J. Joel FBI to investigate rogue computer program at NASA ........... Keith Petersen Future of Libraries and Above and Below ....................... Peter Junger Tablet ............................................................. (PLOCH) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positional Textual References Tom Benson 814-238-5277 (T3B%PSUVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU) In Comp-Soc 3:17 G.R. Meyer wonders whether the above/below usage, referring to a passage of text occuring before or after the reference, is an artifact of computer word processing. No, actually the usage has been around for a long time. In my own opinion, the usage is klutzy and should be avoided in most writing, as should the former/latter construction, which is stuffy and often confusing. One of my teachers, many years ago, wondered whether the above/below usage came from the days when libraries were filled with manuscripts written on continuous rolls of paper. More folklore? Tom Benson Penn State University ------------------------------ Computers, Chemistry and Society William J. Joel (JZEM%MARIST.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU) The following is a draft of a paper that was presented to the recent American Chemical Society National meeting in Toronto, Canada, on June 6. Any comments or suggestions for improvement prior to submission for publication are appreciated. Computers, Chemistry and Society: A Curious Triangle William J. Joel June 3, 1988 D R A F T ABSTRACT In almost every facet of chemistry today, computers play an integral part. Whether it's for the routine gathering of and charting of analytical data or for the modelling of a new, com- plex reaction mechanism, computers relieve the chemist of the repetitive, tedious jobs and afford more time for thinking of the chemistry. What is not often studied is how, when chemists ben- efit from the use of computers, society benefits as well. Or for that matter, the way society views advancements in chemistry as they relate to chemistry's use of computers. By looking at his- torical aspects of both the use of computers by chemists as well as the effect of chemical advancements on society, a clearer understanding of this curious triangle can be attained. INTRODUCTION Chemistry is a natural science that relies upon a vast quanti- ty of mathematics in its daily functions. It is also "a scien- tific discipline with an enormous ouput of, and demand for, data." [1] Computers and Chemistry Since chemistry has such a heavy reliance on mathematics and, as a science, handles large amounts of data, it would be only logical for chemists to seek the aid of computers to relieve themselves of much of the tedious parts of their work. The degree and nature of this interaction between computers and chem- istry has been well documented. Computer technology is approxi- mately over 45 years old and the use computers by chemists is at least 28 years old as evidenced, for instance, by the fact that the Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences is cur- rently in its 28th year of publication. [3] Also, within the chemical field, this symbiosis has been explored by such groups as the American Chemical Society's Divi- sion of Computers in Chemistry. These efforts lead to the con- clusion that this interaction is sufficiently understood by the technical community so as not to create either confusion or mis- understandings. But what of the rest of society? The Other Sides of the Triangle This paper is concerned with a particular societal triangle where those in the chemical and computer fields make up two of the corners and the remainder of society makes up the third cor- ner. [ Figure 1: The curious triangle ] As stated above, those who are in the chemical and computer fields should well understand the interaction between the two groups. Yet information does not always filter out to the remainder of society as easily as one might think. This possible lack of information on the part of what will be called society not only affects its understanding of this interaction but also affects the way in which it forms various views of the two fields, both separately and in unison. :lg. Todya's challenge in communicating scientific achievements is making them under- standable to the nonscientist. Today's public is more educated than in the past and wants to be involved in world happenings but does not always understand the implications of scientific tech- nology. Effective science education and fostering the develop- ment of rational approaches to solving scientific problems instead of prejudicial or emotional reactions are essential if people are to understand and participate in the advancements of science." [5] To sum up, this paper will attempt to explore to what extent society understands how the chem- ical and computer fields interact, show how this level of understanding affects society's views of the two fields, and show an historical basis for these effects. EDUCATION OF SOCIETY There are essentially two ways that society obtains informa- tion about some segment of society. Either members of that seg- ment actively educate the society or, through a variety of commu- nication pathways, the information is transferred. Blind Ignorance If a particular segment of society does not actively educate the rest, and there are no other communications pathways by which this information can be disseminated, then society will never form either a related opinion or a viewpoint. Blind ignorance is this case shields the segment of society from both negative and positive criticism. Unfortunately life is not lived in a vacumn and even if those in the segment do not actively go about educating society, there are always a sufficient number of communication lines available such that the information will spread. The only problem here is that these other communication links can filter the information with the end result that selected pieces of the initial informa- tion get through. A Little Knowledge is Dangerous Since blind ignorance is not possible, due to various communi- cation pathways, society will always receive some part of the initial information packet. As stated, without any educational efforts by the societal segment, the information gets filtered due to a large number of factors. The expression, a little knowledge is dangerous, could well apply here. The Whole Picture One might now ask, to what degree does society today get the whole picture if the societal segment initiates no educational efforts? To answer that question one has to to compare how soci- ety views this segment's activities with how those in the segment view the activities. The closer these views are, the less these communication pathways act as filters. As regards society's view of compters and chemistry, one must first examine these views with respect to the two fields individ- ually and then secondly in unison. Also, since the chemical and computer fields are two of the larger techologies that exist, one should examine society's view of technology in general and see what effect, if any, this has. HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED Society's View of Technology If one were to access society's view of technology today one might immediately come up with words such as "cool" or "antagon- istic" or "cautious". These types of attitudes were not always the case. At the start of the modern scientific era, society actually viewed scientific progress as being an aid to social progress. This is the opinion put forth by Leo Marx in a recent article. [2] Marx states that at the beginning of the modern scientific era, most scientists held a social view of scientific progress. That is, scientific progress should be sought as a means to obtaining social progress, not as a end in itself. Marx goes on to state that in the late 18th century this changed. A technocratic view emerged that believed that scien- tific progress was justified in and of itself, and that social progress would be an ineviatble outcome of any scientific advancements. Unfortunately history has taught us that this does not always hold true. Marx states that since the technocratic view is not always valid, society has of late often rebelled against scien- tific progress as demonstrated by such recent events such as the anti-nuclear and alternative (or appropriate) technology move- ments. The Information Explosion Coupled with this disenchantment in scientific progress, is the growth in communication technology, and computers have played an enormous part in this growth in recent years. Initially communication was oral. One person spoke to another, and then to another, and so on. Just think about the old "telephone" game people play at parties to get a feel for how this can alter information. Next came the written word: first as handwritten letters from one person to another, and then as printed materials, that could be widely distributed. Electronic forms of communications come next and include both radio and television. These mass-media communication tools can spread information worldwide in a matter of minutes. Witness the spead with which events such as the Three-Mile Island incident were communicated to society. The latest step in this evolution of communication technolo- gies is the introduction of digital forms of correspondance. Electronic mail, and public bulletin boards sometimes implemented on nothing more than a simple microcomputer, have increased the number of pathways by which information can travel. It goes without saying that this vast improvement in cummuni- cation technologies has not only aided society but has also aided the chemist. Chemical information has placed very demanding require- ments on information technology, and, at the same time, chemistry has benefited more than any other discipline through the application of information technology. [4] THE CURIOUS TRIANGLE This all leads, then, back to the curious triangle. Computers have helped chemists to do their jobs faster, and more efficient- ly, but at the same time have flooded them with more information than they can digest. It is hoped, though, that computers can also act as a means to eleviate some of this information deluge. [1] At the same time, there has been an information explosion for society as well. This too has been enhanced by the use of com- puter technology. Computers have increased the productivity of chemists. This has led to an increase in the rate of generating new chemical data, as well as an increase in the rate of scientific progress. As communication pathways are more numerous and faster today, society is afforded with an exponentially larger amount of scien- tific, chemical, data. Society is also more disenchanted with science in general, and this increase of scientific information could afford it more fuel for its disillusionment. Society is also more vocal today. The same communication tools that increase the disemmination of scientific information, also aids society in having its voices heard. These messages are often directed at chemists and they are thus forced to respond. The social pressure created by this triangle are that great. CONCLUSIONS The same computer technology that is aiding chemists in their work today is also helping scientific information reach the rest of society. In turn, these new computer/communication capabili- ties are allowing society to put real pressure on chemists to account for themselves. The mere existence of so many active environmental groups backs this up. One interesting new development that has yet to make its full impact felt is the emerging field of artifical intelligence. Alreay society is leary of having a computer think for itself. As chemists take advantage of these expert systems, it will be interesting to see how this affects society's view of chemistry. REFERENCES 1. Luckenbach, R.; "The Free Flow of Information: A Utopia? Ways To Improve Scientific and Technological Information and Its International Exchange"; J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1988, 28, 94-99. 2. Marx, L.; "Does Improved Technology Mean Progress?"; Tech. Rev. Jan., 1987, 90(1), 32-41+. 3. Skolnik, H.; "The Journal of Chemical Information and Com- puter Scientists: A 25-Year Perspective"; J. Chem. Inf. Com- put. Sci. 1985, 25, 137-140. 4. Wigington, R.L.; "Evolution of Information Technology and Its Impact on Chemical Information"; J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1987, 27, 51-55. 5. Zaye, D.F.; Metanomski, W. V.; "Scientific Communication Pathways: An Overview and Introduction to a Symposium"; J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1986, 26, 43-44. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Bowman, C.M.; Nosal, J.A.; Rogers, A.E.; "Effect of New Technology on Information Transfer in the 1990s"; J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1987, 27, 147-151. 2. Cornish, E.; "The Great Transformation (editorial)"; The Futurist" Mar/Apr 1987, 21(2), 2 + 58. 3. Hamburg, D.A.; "Science and Technology in a World Trans- formed"; Science 1984, 224, 943-946. ------------------------------ FBI to investigate rogue computer program at NASA Keith Petersen (W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARPA) FBI TO INVESTIGATE ROGUE COMPUTER PROGRAM AT NASA NEW YORK (JULY 4) UPI - NASA officials have called on the FBI to investigate a rogue computer program that has destroyed information stored on its personal computers and those of several other government agencies, The New York Times reported today. The program was designed to sabotage computer programs at Electronic Data Systems of Dallas, the Times said. It did little damage to the Texas company, but wreaked havoc on thousands of personal computers nationwide, company spokesman Bill Wright told the newspaper. Although damage to government data was limited, NASA officials have asked the FBI to enter the case since files were destroyed, projects delayed and hundreds of hours spent tracking the electronic culprit at NASA and at the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United States Sentencing Commission. It was not known how the program, which damaged files during a five-month period beginning in January, spread from the Texas company to networks of personal computers and whether it was deliberately introduced at government agencies or brought in accidentally, the Times said. The computer program is one of at least 40, termed ''viruses,'' now identified in the United States, computer experts said. Viruses are designed to conceal their presence on a disk and to replicate themselves repeatedly onto other disks and into the memory banks of computers. The program currently being investigated is called the scores virus, the newspaper said. Some government officials say viruses are spread through informal networks of government computer users who exchange publicly available software. Viruses often lie dormant and then explode on a certain day or on contact with a specific computer program. They can erase entire disks, such as happened with a one word virus that flashed the word ''Gotcha!'' ------------------------------ Future of Libraries and Above and Below Peter Junger (JUNGER%CWRU.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU) Although the local suburban public library may well disappear for lack of users, I cannot imagine that research libraries will disappear. I do not see how it could be economically possible for all the data that is available--and sometimes needed--to be converted to electronically readable media. For example, I once was involved in an unfair competition suit involving the fingernail clipper industry and went to the New York public library to look for old pictures of fingernail clippers. I found a great publication called _Messer und Schere_ (Knives and Scissors) which was a trade paper of the Solingen steel industry. The issues were all bound together between sheets of cardboard held together with string. I imagine that I am the only person who ever looked at them, but they were useful to me. The librarians were horrified when I told them that the issues published during the second World War were missing -- I imagine that they have replaced them by now. I just don't see how that sort of information can ever be available on a commercial data base. As to the use of "above" and "below," those terms afflicted some types of scholarly writing long before word processors were invented. Legal academics used them long before 1955 when I went to law school. Some of us still use them. We also use their Latin equivalents for cross references in footnotes. Below you will find two examples taken from the "Blue Book", A Uniform System of Citation (14th ed.) 21: _See infra_ p. 50 & note 100. _See supra_ text accompanying notes 305-07. Similar examples could be found in earlier editions of the Blue Book. The Uniform System has been incorporated into a computer program which purports to spot errors in one's citation forms. A know one or two people who actually use the computerized version and several more who like to produce text that it can't handle. The latter have the easier time of it. ------------------------------ Tablet PLOCH (PLOCH@utkvx1.utk.edu) About TABLET Two social issues arise in the projected use of TABLET: the nature of human interaction and the content of education. TABLET becomes the student's most important companion. All study activities are done in isolation with human interaction mediated by TABLET. In a social situation with strangers, TABLET can be instructed either to probe the area looking for "appropriate" contacts -- "appropriate" based on the limited personal data being broadcast by other probers -- or can be instructed to be mute indicating a desire for isolation. The end of the casual pick-up; more important the end of the casual sparring that one uses to come to know a stranger. "Data" broadcast by the stranger replace mannerisms, voice inflec- tion, smiles, "zits" on the nose, etc. The future will not be this isolated. In the year 2000 we will still be trying to read body language. To be fair, the authors of the article I read (Academic Computing. May/June 1988 pp. 7-12,62-65) were ambivalent about this isolation. For example, they say "Students will take their work to where other students are, instead of taking themselves to where the classes are." (p64). Still when they focus on the typical daily round of student and professor, neither of these is rich in human contact. TABLETs are used in isolation. One reason for this may be that the bulk of contemporary software is to be used in isolation. There is very little software -- none that I have used -- that supports group interaction. (Email and message systems don't count. Most conferencing systems are border- line.) While TABLET is clearly a communication device, there is no indication that it will support group activity. The lectures are done in "real" time, else they couldn't be interrupted for questions. About 30% of the students show up for the professor's lecture. I imagine many others are in small groups with friends because learning involves conversations with colleagues -- if for no other reason than to confirm insight. Whether one talks of an academic community or a group of workers (e.g. Kidder, Birth of a New Machine or Zuboff, In the Age of the Smart Machine), learning occurs in dynamic interaction with others. The student does a chemistry experiment on TABLET -- but the experiment is simulated. Is it appropriate or wise to do all chemistry -- and by inference all science and engineering -- by simulation. Weizenbaum (Computer Power and Human Reason) argues that the drive toward simulation of experience is unwise. We need to know that nature can be recalcitrant; that life in "real" time is not as readily manipulated as life on the screen. There is a point to chemis- try experiments; they verify theory. Without experiments, chemistry is like medieval theology -- a fine logical structure but rather detached from common experience. Note well that when the professor goes home to work on his car, TABLET is used to diagnose the trouble, sketch the offending parts in situ, and as a general guide to the work. Why couldn't it act this way in a student lab? Again the author's seem aware of the problem. They state,"No simulation is better than its underlying model of the world." True! But simulations are tested only by comparing the model with reality. The purpose of labs is to train students to make these comparisons appropriately. Indeed, one might argue that a general purpose of education is to help people develop and test better models of reality. This raises the larger issue -- not addressed by the authors of TABLET -- what is to be taught? What can be left to the drone (TABLET) which works without fail and what must be held in the only associational memory available, the human brain? The problem with any program to search a data base -- even one that searches for words in context -- is that it will miss the odd connections that are often the beginning of insight. What program, searching data bases for Zen Buddhism, would have made a link to motorcycle maintenance? John Kemeny (Mathematics: How Computers Have Changed the Way I Teach. Academic Computing May/June 1988 pp 44-45,59-61) says he has dropped most of the routine teaching of differential and integral calculus because these subjects -- if tractable at all -- can be better done by machines. They require the application of rules, which machines do faster and more reliably than humans. He has students use machines to support work in numerical integration and the solution of quadratic forms. Uses of this sort seem more realistic for the year 2000 than the picture in TABLET. TABLET is a black box. The authors assume that technology is/will be avail- able. The focus is on organizational and social aspects of life with TABLET. They picture life and learning as isolated interactions with TABLET. Not realistic! Not viable! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: For the next few weeks the information server that was available as info@atom is shut down while I move my home to another computer. It is expected to return shortly. Articles for submission to the digest should be sent to the editor, Dave Taylor, at either of the following electronic addresses: comp-soc@hplabs.hp.com ...!hplabs!comp-soc This digest is published approximately weekly, the articles representing the views of the authors, not the Computers and Society Digest editorial staff, Hewlett-Packard, or anyone else. The copyright to each article is owned by the author, the copyright of the entire digest (including format) is (C) Copyright 1988 Dave Taylor. Unless otherwise explicitly stated, any article can be retransmitted as long as an appropriate citation of the source is included. ___________________________________________________________________________ | | | End of Computers & Society Digest | |___________________________________________________________________________|