◆ [Date updated: 2023/01/19(Thu) 20:25:19]
　■Here's an interesting UseNet post:
　│
　│Date: Monday, 10 May 1982 14:58-PDT
　│Subject: Another irreversable and unconscious decision
　│From: norm at RAND-UNIX
　│
　│I believe that American Society is in the process of unconsciusly
　│committing itself to an irreversable restructuring based on an undesigned
　│network -- a single national (nay, international) net composed of many
　│overlapping nets of computers.  I believe that as this undesigned net
　│evolves, all of us and our institutions will change to exploit and
　│accomodate it.  I belive that these changes will make it impossible to
　│"change our minds" about the use of this net.
　│
　│I don't assert that this development is good or that it is bad.  I do
　│assert that we, as a society, should try and understand what we are doing
　│and decide if we want to do it.
　│
　│An example of a technology which society irreversibly adapted without any
　│consideration by any of the members or institutions of society of its
　│irreversibility and of the wisdom of making that irreversible step, is the
　│institution of the privately owned automobile and supporting institutions,
　│including the road networks, the fuel distribution systems, motels, etc.,
　│and all the other private and government institutions associated with the
　│private passenger automobile.  I do not argue that the adoption of the
　│privately owned passenger automobile as one of our principal modes of human
　│transportation was wise or unwise.  I only argue
　│
　│(1) that its adoption was essentially an irreversible "decision."
　│Irreversible not in that if society wanted to badly enough the "decision"
　│could not be reversed, but that we could not now do so without large-scale
　│economic, political and social dislocations which, as a result, make the
　│"decision", in effect, irreversible.
　│
　│and
　│
　│(2) this "decision" was made by society without very much of any deliberate
　│awareness by the members of society, by any of the professional thinkers of
　│the society, or by the institutions of the society that we were going down
　│a path of no return.  Each individual and institution took very minor steps
　│which seemed reasonable and which did not seem very dramatic at the time.
　│
　│and
　│
　│(3) this decision changed the way we court, work, play, sleep, buy,
　│sell,...  It effected everthing from our sexual mores to our legal system.
　│
　│Another example is the recent revolution in retail credit generated by the
　│bank credit cards.  This application of computer technology has, I believe,
　│irreversibly revolutionized and changed the nature of retail credit.
　│Again, I do not argue as to whether or not the decision was a good one or a
　│bad one.  I only argue that it could not now be reversed without shocks to
　│the nature of our economy, and that the acts constituting the decision to
　│go to this type of retail credit system were never considered by society as
　│to their wisdom as to whether or not they were worth going to, etc.
　│
　│We have not yet committed ourselves to the reorganization of society which
　│will depend on everybody and every institution being on line.  Do we want
　│to?  What would the consequences be?  How do we decide if we want to travel
　│down this one way road?
　│
　└■norm at RAND-UNIX was a wise man (;ﾟ∇ﾟ)
　　│
　　└■These UseNet posts in general give off an enlightened, even-keeled air that's all but vanished from today's Web.(;´Д`)