TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

169 点作者 johntfella将近 3 年前

27 条评论

dredmorbius将近 3 年前
Berry&#x27;s nine standards for technology are worth considering:<p>1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces.<p>2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces.<p>3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces.<p>4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces.<p>5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body.<p>6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools.<p>7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible.<p>8. It should come from a small, privately owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair.<p>9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships.<p>I&#x27;m not sure even his own tool choices (typewriter and wife) meet the criteria. The typewriter replaced the quill pen, and at least initially failed conitions 1, 4, 8, and 9.<p>There might also be other factors for consideration. I&#x27;m <i>not</i> prone to jump on the latest technologies, but do own several computers (and a typewriter). Net effectiveness, suitability to task, expansion of possibilities, and other factors are amongst those I&#x27;d consider. Many of Berry&#x27;s concerns would seem to me to come from the realm of <i>unintended consequences</i>, and might be better considered in that light.<p>His is a useful meditation, whether or not you adopt its conclusions.
评论 #31820947 未加载
评论 #31822802 未加载
评论 #31821567 未加载
评论 #31822521 未加载
评论 #31825669 未加载
jimhi将近 3 年前
Holy cow - this guy still does not own a computer.<p>From: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;culture&#x2F;the-new-yorker-interview&#x2F;going-home-with-wendell-berry" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;culture&#x2F;the-new-yorker-interview&#x2F;g...</a><p>&quot;Berry, who is now eighty-four, does not own a computer or a cell phone, and his landline is not connected to an answering machine. We corresponded by mail for a year&quot;
评论 #31817934 未加载
评论 #31817465 未加载
评论 #31819078 未加载
siraben将近 3 年前
One reply seems quite prescient for its time, clashing against the attitude of the original author.<p><pre><code> We should support alternatives both to coal- generated electricity and to IBM-style technocracy. But I am reluctant to entertain alternatives that presuppose the traditional subservience of one class to another. Let the PCs come and the wives and servants go seek more meaningful work. -- Toby Koosman, Knoxville, TN</code></pre>
评论 #31818937 未加载
评论 #31818560 未加载
评论 #31822602 未加载
karaterobot将近 3 年前
None of his points in this piece are wrong, including the one about him not buying a computer. They may be arguable, in fact may be highly debatable, but they&#x27;re at least positions a reasonable person could have, even if other reasonable people disagree. Indeed, reasonable people can hold a variety of differing opinions, and understanding the ones you disagree with is a really satisfying activity. Good for him, not buying that computer.
评论 #31817972 未加载
UncleOxidant将近 3 年前
&gt; My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then.<p>This was written in the late 80s, but I&#x27;d guess they&#x27;re still using that typewriter over 60 years after it&#x27;s purchase. Not saying I completely agree with his whole essay, but there&#x27;s not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era.<p>&gt; But the cost would not be just mone- tary. It is well understood that technological innovation always requires the discarding of the &quot;old model&quot;<p>He&#x27;s not wrong. Just try to go dig up an old laptop from ~20 years ago that you might have laying around somewhere. Yes, it might work (after you replace the battery), but can you transfer files to&#x2F;from it now if it didn&#x27;t have USB ports then? Or if it didn&#x27;t have the current USB port that all your current devices use? Floppies were ubiquitous in the 90s, but try reading one now - it&#x27;s not impossible, but you&#x27;ll probably have to find some service to help you do that since it&#x27;s not likely that you&#x27;ve had a floppy drive for close to 20 years.<p>As an example, I&#x27;d like to get an e-reader that would be usable in 20+ years. But that doesn&#x27;t seem likely. The batteries aren&#x27;t easy to change in most of these devices anymore and they&#x27;ll likely fail long before that. Many of them use android and when support for your device is over... you could probably use it for a while, but eventually it&#x27;s going to be difficult.<p>All that to say that Mr. Berry&#x27;s choice doesn&#x27;t seem all that crazy to me.
评论 #31818197 未加载
评论 #31818277 未加载
评论 #31817627 未加载
评论 #31817667 未加载
评论 #31820062 未加载
评论 #31819222 未加载
评论 #31822295 未加载
评论 #31817874 未加载
评论 #31819765 未加载
dang将近 3 年前
Related:<p><i>Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer (1988) [pdf]</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=25598811" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=25598811</a> - Jan 2021 (3 comments)<p><i>Wendell Berry: Why I am Not going to buy a computer</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=2108463" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=2108463</a> - Jan 2011 (11 comments)
jklm将近 3 年前
His arguments are, paraphrased:<p>1. It hurts nature.<p>2. It&#x27;s too expensive and destroys existing jobs.<p>3. It&#x27;s unlikely that it&#x27;s better than the current tech.<p>And that he won&#x27;t fall for the &quot;propaganda campaign&quot; that says otherwise.<p>---<p>What I find super fascinating here is that the arguments back then and now are...extremely similar.<p>Look at any cutting-edge tech - EVs, crypto, etc. - and you find the same arguments rehashed in different ways. E.g. EVs hurt nature because of battery disposal issues, crypto uses a ton of energy for a slower database.<p>Food for thought: are we really all that different from Wendell in 2022?
评论 #31819729 未加载
评论 #31821143 未加载
评论 #31819578 未加载
评论 #31819598 未加载
评论 #31822394 未加载
sudobash1将近 3 年前
Tangentially related, Wendell Berry&#x27;s short stories &amp; novels are an excellent read. They all take place in the same fictional small town and are remarkably consistent with one another in terms of timeline, genealogy, and geography. I would highly recommend them.
评论 #31819039 未加载
评论 #31817995 未加载
评论 #31818056 未加载
Ruq将近 3 年前
I really like when he points out his own Standards for Technological Innovation. They are very good points regardless of the current age.<p>Particularly to me, are the points of repairability, and interfering with real-world relationships.<p>There are few exceptions to the rule where most systems today cannot be self-repaired, much less taken to a local shop and repaired with off-the-shelf parts (thankfully this is slowly changing for the better.)<p>In terms of relationships, it would seem to be a mixed bag. In some respects you can communicate across vast distances without a second thought. In others it would seem we are headed to our own doom due to toxicity, disconnect and disassociation from those around us, etc.
joerter12将近 3 年前
“I do not see that computers are bringing us one step nearer to anything that does matter to me: peace, economic justice, ecological health, political honesty, family and community stability, good work.”<p>Damn.
DanCarvajal将近 3 年前
Wendell Barry is not for everyone, I have only read a few of his essays but I’ve read most of his Port Williams series which I think everyone should at least read a book from. I grew up pretty rural and there’s no better series is my mind that captures the complicated feelings of loss and nostalgia for a type of living that’s long gone, but also may never have existed as we remember.
npalli将近 3 年前
To be fair, if you are a writer it might be better to work primarily with paper and pen as it allows quite a bit of flexibility in how you organize&#x2F;edit the text while keeping everything in front of you. Having done the paper&#x2F;pen work, final editing, spell check etc. can be done on a computer which would be far superior to a typewriter at this point.
uncomputation将近 3 年前
&gt; I disbelieve, and therefore strongly resent, the assertion that I or anybody else could write better or more easily with a computer than with a pencil.<p>I can’t speak to writing, which I actually do find much easier on a computer since I can backspace, rearrange, spell-check, but there is certainly truth to reading. I find reading to “stick” longer in my brain when off of hard paper than a screen, most likely something to do with the physical location of the words.
评论 #31818036 未加载
quickthrower2将近 3 年前
He is kind of like the original RMS, as he talks about repairability and things being made for the user (like really for the user, not kinda for the user, kinda for the corporation).
schoen将近 3 年前
Nathaniel Borenstein, one of the people who wrote a letter in response, co-invented MIME!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nathaniel_Borenstein" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nathaniel_Borenstein</a>
goatsneez将近 3 年前
I liked the read despite its predictable, unoriginal, oft-repeated decry of technology with respect to its (perceived) environmental burden. There are several replies by Berry&#x27;s contemporaries which vocalize their disagreement with his position and his justification.<p>With the distance in time to this piece, I think the point to add to the discussion is that a key implicit assumption of Berry (and in fact even to his opponents) is false. The assumption that the default mode of civilization is prosperity for all. Same mistake we make till today on all levels of politics and education.<p>Poverty is the natural state of &quot;cosmos&quot;, and perhaps an equivalent of physical entropy concept. In a closed system a dis-order increases until we are all equally poor (there is NO natural&#x2F;social law&#x2F;system in the cosmos where would guarantee all of us equally rich&#x2F;valuable by default). At the same time full and complete poverty for all can never be reached because (some) life-agents itself will try to utilize energy within (social&#x2F;environmental) system to create pockets of prosperity, naturally syphoning out energy from the rest of the system. I do not want to imply a political of economic system within a conceptual paragraph -- that would be overextending the idea. The point is in my view that Berry does not ask the right question, or assumes the wrong default.
评论 #31817477 未加载
pmoriarty将近 3 年前
Also see this Ted Nelson interview from 1979:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RVU62CQTXFI" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=RVU62CQTXFI</a>
phendrenad2将近 3 年前
I don&#x27;t own a computer. I have a pocket tablet that shows me the newspaper (and makes phonecalls). I have a screen on my desk that plays old Nintendo games. I have a typewriter which I use to write computer code. But I have no interest in owning a computer.
评论 #31817436 未加载
评论 #31817600 未加载
评论 #31825596 未加载
pddpro将近 3 年前
People decry the energy wastage brought about by the Crypto Mining, rampant invasion of privacy &amp; trust by mega corporations, ubiquitous presence of misinformation and vitriol in social media, mismanagement of e-waste, global climate change and the impending doom upon the entire human civilization, and a thousand things more, and yet find this article condescending.<p>This is not to say that I agree entirely with it either but, I find myself empathizing with the author at some level. If nothing more, it&#x27;s a fun mental exercise to imagine what life today would be like had there been no personal computing.
评论 #31820833 未加载
coldtea将近 3 年前
How right was he...<p>If he indeed didn&#x27;t buy one, he was spared 30+ years of technology catchup, crappy updates, encroaching on everyday life, privacy issues, and more...
fedeb95将近 3 年前
I like this kind of discussions and as members of society it&#x27;s hard to reason on things that are widely accepted. If one shares his point of view but doesn&#x27;t want to give up his personal computer, one way may be to buy an used computer or repair one if possible. You&#x27;d still use energy, but at least won&#x27;t support the making of new electronics which is a waste too
MrYellowP将近 3 年前
Actually Wife is far more energy&#x2F;work intensive than a computer. She requires constant maintenance, she has plenty of alarm bells that can&#x27;t be turned off at all, her speaker constantly makes noise that can&#x27;t be turned off either, costs way more to keep and, on top of all of that, has way more downtime.
评论 #31821955 未加载
bencollier49将近 3 年前
&gt; It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships.<p>The man was bang on (for example, with reference to the discussion of intimate relationships posted here today).
iRomain将近 3 年前
I laughed so hard at Gordon Inkeles&#x27; response.<p>Wendell Berry:<p><pre><code> My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then. As she types, she sees things that are wrong and marks them with small checks in the margins. </code></pre> Gordon Inkeles:<p><pre><code> Wendell Berry provides writers enslaved by the computer with a handy alternative: Wife - a low-tech energy-saving device. Drop a pile of handwritten notes on Wife and you get back a finished manuscript, edited while it was typed. What computer can do that? Wife meets all of Berry&#x27;s uncompromising standards for techno- logical innovation: she&#x27;s cheap, repairable near home, and good for the family structure. Best of all, Wife is politically correct because she breaks a writer&#x27;s &quot;direct dependence on strip-mined coal.&quot; History teaches us that Wife can also be used to beat rugs and wash clothes by hand, thus eliminating the need for the vacuum cleaner and washing machine, two more nasty machines that threaten the act of writing.</code></pre>
评论 #31819695 未加载
评论 #31818558 未加载
评论 #31817890 未加载
评论 #31820036 未加载
评论 #31821113 未加载
评论 #31818975 未加载
评论 #31820919 未加载
评论 #31819433 未加载
julienb_sea将近 3 年前
I&#x27;m amused at the mix of condescension and vehement beliefs contained in this essay. There is some irony as his beloved typewriter is a consumer-good technological invention which happens to be his &quot;established&quot; tool. There are legitimate critiques in the piece, especially around repairability, supporting the local community.<p>Blanket disregarding the reality of technological advancement and the prosperity it can bring is an ideologically extreme position. Billions of people can grow far beyond their circumstances of birth with access to inexpensive cellphones. We can be thankful that consumers and technologists pressed onwards with their efforts despite the dramatic moral take presented by the author.
geocrasher将近 3 年前
The original Computer Vegan, complaining about the coal used to power a computer while at the same time using a typewriter that is made of steel that had to be fired and forged probably using coal. I&#x27;m not saying he&#x27;s wrong, but unless he mines his own metal and has a solar powered forge, he&#x27;s fooling himself.
评论 #31818545 未加载
评论 #31817891 未加载
评论 #31817778 未加载
评论 #31818166 未加载
sydthrowaway将近 3 年前
We should not celebrate this luddite.
评论 #31817712 未加载
评论 #31817923 未加载