DON.KIMBERLIN@p6.f889.n106.z1.fidonet.org (DON KIMBERLIN) (01/14/90)
BB>> bbs's..perhaps a point for COSUARD! Is SWBT being so commercially BB>> crass they would hinder the well-stated need to get Americans BB>> up to computer speed? (You said it real right, the way it hit me.) BB> BB>I think the earlier point about illiteracy is better.. If FORCES you BB>read! Lots of stuff.. Hundreds of K of stuff.. Millions of DUPES... BB>(No, my fingers are running away with me now...) ..Dupes? UH-oh, folks, I think he's talking to me! (should we continue this elsewhere, my patient and finger-tired Sysop?) ..In a more COSUARD-y plane, here's a hostorical observation on "the phone:" The fledgling Bell interests of the early years were on the edge of financial failure for about 20 years, you know. At the time when the phone arrived, the most powerful comunications medium, and indeed, one of the most powerful businesses on the globe was the Telegraph company. EVERYbody who was ANYbody sent telegrams. It should be here noted that Alexander Bell did not conceive of a bell on the phone. You'll see that official Bell histories make much of his invention of the word "halloo" as a calling signal on the phone. Bell only thought of it in the way the British had blown over the end of a Victorian speaking tube to signal a call, hence the British slang for the phone, "blower." It was L.M. Ericsson who connected a magneto generator to the line and put a nice, civilized tinkling bell on the phone. (Of course, Bell histories neglect this point, just the way all propaganda omits things that might water the power of their story.) At any rate, the fledgling Bell companies were reduced to giving phones away to try to get people to use them. Western Union for a time persued developing the phone, but one day after observing Bell's fiascoes for a decade or so, decided it was never going to gain acceptance with the business community, so abandoned its efforts. What DID happen was that the waves of immigrants who landed in the ghettoes of NY, Boston and such of the 1890's found that the "phone" had a saving grace...you did not need to be literate in English to use the phone! They could establish their own sociological networks on the phone, when the Telegraph company refused to handle anything except a written note in English. The phone mushroomed in the ghettos of the large cities. Those 1890's pictures you see of the overladen crossarms of wires are the non-literate immigrants of the ghettos being the major users of the new technology. ..So, the phone has a point that runs counter to our current need to increase literacy. It is a technology that promotes illiteracy! ..How about THAT one, bbs'ers? . EZ 1.24 . Safety Harbor Institute of Technology PCRelay:PETEXCH -> RelayNet(tm) 4.10.9 St Pete Programmers Exchg *HST* 813 527-5666