[comp.society] Effect of Computers on Society at Large

marsh@mitre-bedford.ARPA (Ralph J. Marshall) (03/25/88)

It seems to me that this group should also be addressing the problems
faced by people who are not computer literate at any level, and thus
are in severe danger of becoming part of a permanent underclass in our
society.  I think it will become increasingly difficult to get a decent
job in this country if you are unable to even USE a computer, let alone
program one.  Yet this is the same country where we have unbeliveable
rates of high-school drop-outs who are often unable to even read
English well enough to understand on-screen prompts and instructions.

An example of this occurred last night (althoug it was admittedly 
not typical of the main problem I forsee).  I was in line at an ATM
waiting for the man at the head of the line to complete his transaction.
He was apparently a recent Asian immigrant who spoke fairly good English
(certainly better than I speak any Asian languages :-)) but seemed unable
to understand the prompts to withdraw cash.  The guy behind him helped
him through the process, but it made me wonder about the future for
people who are _already_ short of skills needed to find a job.  What will
happen to them as everyday life requires more technical understanding,
and what will happen to our society as a larger and larger section of
the populace is disenfranchised ?  These are serious problems caused at
least in part by the wide-spread use of computers, and I don't have any
obvious answers.  Anybody else have some encouraging words, or suggestions
as to what might be done to avoid dooming large numbers of people to 
menial labor or unemployment in a workplace with fewer and fewer
'traditional' jobs ?

Ralph

klg@dukeac.UUCP (Kim Greer) (03/30/88)

Ralph Marshall writes:

> It seems to me that this group should also be addressing the problems
> faced by people who are not computer literate at any level, and thus
> are in severe danger of becoming part of a permanent underclass in our
> society...

Ralph,

I think you answered part of your question yourself:

> Yet this is the same country where we have unbeliveable rates of 
> high-school drop-outs who are often unable to even read English well 
> enough to understand on-screen prompts and instructions.

My response is that if someone does not like the state they are in
they should do something to change it.  Let's ignore for now the 
people who really, truely are incapable of "using computers".  I
believe that most people who are at least a little a bit literate
can, with _a little help_, perform virtually anything necessary
on a computer in their day to day life.  Note that I did not say
they will become experienced assembly language programmers 
overnight.  In your posting, your example was the ATM.  If the
man cannot use the ATM, maybe he should actually go in the bank
( yes, people still _actually_ go in banks  :)  ) and ask the
employees for some instructions.  I think this is usually offered
by the bank when accounts are set up anyway for ATMs.  Anyway,
my point is :  If someone is "disenfranchised" from using 
computers because they can't read, let them learn how to read.
All through high school, I saw the people roaming the hallways
causing disturbances during classtime and who now I'm sure are
incapable of doing anything with their lives...because they are
semi-literate at best and are generally ignorant (ie, uneducated).
Is this my fault? No.  They made their decisions; I made mine.
As I said, this may seem harsh.  I don't want to deny anyone their
fair share of life's rewards.  But ! people are generally able
to do anything they really want to.  People are responsible for
making their lives what they wish them to be.  Others cannot, and
generally should not, do this for them, outside of making 
available the opportunity to do so.

Kim L. Greer                       

shani@TAURUS.BITNET (Oren Shani) (04/04/88)

Ralph Marshall wrote:

> It seems to me that this group should also be addressing the problems
> faced by people who are not computer literate at any level, and thus
> are in severe danger of becoming part of a permanent underclass in our
> society.

I'm glad you are out there to defend the weak, but I belive the problem 
is not that big - or at least may be reduced easily, by making sure that 
the children of today will be ready to the world of tommorow (And there's 
a lot more in that then just knowing how to use a computer)...

...People all over the world, including myself, are working on it... so 
hang on!

Oren Shani

ps: Once I will have practical ideas and plans, I promise to send them on 
    the net.

haste+@andrew.cmu.edu (Dani Zweig) (04/04/88)

Ralph J. Marshall wrote:

> ... I think it will become increasingly difficult to get a decent job 
> in this country if you are unable to even USE a computer, let alone 
> program one....dooming large numbers of people to menial labor or 
> unemployment in a workplace with fewer and fewer 'traditional' jobs ?

The phrase "use a computer" is ill-defined.  In many ways computers are
becoming easier and easier for non-specialists to use.  Functional literacy 
is often optional.  Is the claim that people won't be able to get jobs as
cashiers because they don't know how to run a light pen over a package?  
Seems improbable.  That people won't be able to get jobs as bank tellers 
unless they're taught to use the bank's terminals?  Sounds familiar, but not
alarming.

It seems to me that the sum total of the argument is that ex-steelworkers and
ex-carpenters and ex-automobile-workers are not going to get middle management
jobs if they are not computer literate.  And, sure enough, they aren't getting
them.  Of course, other people *are* getting them.

> ... it made me wonder about the future for people who are _already_ short 
> of skills needed to find a job.

There aren't large numbers of jobs (on a national scale) going begging 
because people don't have the skills to fill them.  It would be nice if 
there were.  So until more jobs are created, giving people who are "already 
short of skills" the requisite skills is the democratic thing to do -- it 
would increase the number of people in competition for the scarce good 
jobs -- but it wouldn't decrease the number of people going *without* those 
jobs.

Dani Zweig