taylor@hplabs.HP.COM (Dave Taylor) (11/22/87)
For various reasons which I'll be detailing to the group in the near future, it has become quite important to create a complete as possible list of subscribers. So, if you can find a few seconds to spare, please drop me a brief note with your name and mailing address. If you have a 'relevant' institutional affiliation (e.g. the OSA, NSF, etc) please include that too. You can mail them directly to me, or you can submit them as articles for the newsgroup since those get automatically routed to me too. Those of you that read this on 'foreign' networks (BITNET, JUNet, FIDONet, and other further flung systems) please also try to respond including a note about how you get ahold of the digest. To send me mail you can use: taylor@hplabs.HP.COM from ARPA/MILNET gatech \ cbosgd \ mcnc !hplabs!taylor from the UUCP world kaist / kddlab / taylor@hplabs.csnet from CSNET or, if you cannot figure out a functional path, a note via postal mail would be most appreciated: Dave Taylor / Hewlett-Packard Labs - 3L 1501 Page Mill Road Palo Alto CA 94304 USA Thank you all!! -- Dave Taylor
osborn@nswitgould.oz.au (Tom Osborn) (12/06/87)
I have concerns about the impact on University level education of the computing industry's needs (labour, advice, market manipulation, ...). In Australia, as elsewhere, the formal, critical, broadbased components of professional degree courses have been hacked away in the pursuit of national productivity. Specific computing industry requirements for programmers and jargon-competent front-persons are more easily produced (trained) than more solidly educated graduates. Funds flow to more 'productive' courses so that ultimately, the typical graduate 'knows all the words' and codes well, but seldom 'sees the point'. Formal foundations, analytical and critical skills, broad background and literacy/appreciation skills may not be necessary for the COBOL programmer on an IBM 4381 (or whatever the name may be). However, not everyone desires to start with, or remain in, such a job - but that is what they get trained for. NORMALISATION of our graduates can only have the following consequences: Lack of intelligent computer professional input at upper management levels in companies and organisations. The influence of accountants and economists needs balance. On one hand from those who can say what can be reasonably done, and on the other hand, from the judgement of well educated, clear-thinking professionals who don't reason by balance sheets; Psychological alienation of a well-paid but bored, competitive class of computer graduates. It often imagine computing jobs as like rows of battery hens; Reduction in the talent development of 'bright young men and women' who would otherwise contribute to R&D, Universities, commentators and general trouble-shooters; With a reduced importance placed on underlying reasons (and general abstract thought), ethical development must suffer. When a pragmatic education orients the graduate to 'get it done', internalised values of integrity and responsibility suffer (eg 'three assignments in one week' - none are done well and cheating is rife). Of course the bottleneck of software maintenance and production reduces, of course the competitiveness of the firms improves, at least in the short term and as a zero-th order effect. In the long term and for wider ranging effects, the consequences clearly need more thought and better planning even agreement. The whole world may well become a BANANA REPUBLIC yet. I also feel that industry should take much more financial responsibility for education (especially in Australia) and with even less control over the decision making and planning. If further high level training alone is desired, then that should be paid for IN FULL (through some mechanism or other). We should always keep in mind that the LACK of a strong, broad education is much more expensive than the cost of having one. Technical skills ON TOP OF a good education will outperform and fail less often. The Protestant Work Ethic may give you an industrious, loyal, aggressive workforce, but what does it provide for adaptability, innovativeness, social conscience and integrity? Tomasso. (Tom Osborn)