8 Apr
2001
8 Apr
'01
3:27 a.m.
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
It depends on your definition of 'kid'.
I'm 22, but I am probably
near the young end of the distribution as well. The fact that we're
young, however, does not make us any less deserving of the pleasure of
exploring the history of computing through classic computers.
Granted, we might know less than the older gurus here, but we are just
as important. Lack of knowledge is a temporary obstacle; even the
gurus were neophytes once. If the traditions, folklore, and spirit of
computing in ages past are to survive, then at some point the flag
must be passed to the next generation.
Nope, we intend to keep everything from you young whipper-snappers. Your
first history lesson is to understand that computers used to sit behind
big panes of glass, accessible only to the priesthood that maintained
them. You communed with them only through a small hole where you passed
your punched cards and got your results back (usually just error
messages).
So too it is with computer history. You can only have access to the
knowledge we pass to you through the little hole in the window. Do not
try to subvert our authority or we will find it fit to smite thee.
And let's just get one thing straight, you were either born to compute or
you ended up being some post-degree market-molded wannabee nerd who
couldn't get a job in your chosen profession and just jumped on the
bandwagon during the great Internet bubble economy of the late 1990s and
"became" a programmer.
So it is not true that "gurus were neophytes once". Gurus are born,
not made.
Ah, nothing like a good rabble rousing to start a Sunday morning.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org