From: sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu (Sergei Borodin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet
Subject: RE: Some thoughts on ... culture
Date: 22 Dec 92 23:45:16 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania




In article <SCS-L%92122208275414@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU> "soc.culture.soviet via ListServ" <SCS-L@indycms.iupui.edu> writes:


>Appologies accepted, no prob.  Actually (believe it or not) I was not talking
>particularly about you in my first post 

 Sure, I beleive you - for a very simple reason - It's kinda 
 hard to make me beleive in my own stupidity or whatever :)

> BTW, I consider (my personal opinion) usage of
>'mat' in public places as one of signs that one is moving in that
>direction (a good 'hot' word sometimes does not hurt, but in certain quantities
>and not in public discussions).

  Agree. And it was certainly true in xSU, and I still get shocked 
  when I hear something like that in *russian* movies. However, we
  might have a different phenomena here. In American movies, which
  actually make a mass culture, swear words are a must, so people 
  get used to it.  I guess, many people from xSU might consider it
  as a simbol of liberation, especially thinking about xSU as 
  a "prison of nations".  Actually, I had a couple of friends 
  back in Russia, who were involved in movie business and they
  saw a sort of "bone tone" to swear in public - not that they were
  "low lifes" but rather the environment they worked in makes the
  things different (recent soviet movies -"chernuha" - perfectly
  prove my words - like a shit called "Taxi Blues").
  
  I, myself, cant't resist when I see a trite joke posted by a woman.
  Zasluzhila, dura.

>  There are certain standards and values and
>ethics, which indicates other signs (like don't eat with your legs, for instan-
>ce :-)

  Kinda hard, isn't it?

>  For instance, someone said that Sovoks are always ignorant to how surrounding
>will look at them.  Are too straight forward.  Too impolite.  Too loud.  I mean,
>there are many 'prejudices', but the point is that all these characteristics
>I can find in myself, and sometimes not!  Even more, I can find completely
>opposite.

  Actually, I don't like the term "sovok". The instance you wrote,
  compiled somebodies word, is a bullshit.  People are different and
  no one can make a generalization like that. I often see that 
  instance here in the US and I can`t suspect people who demonstrate
  that of being "sovoks". I, myself, won't participate in the discussion
  about characteristics of "sovoks" - it doesn't make any sense to me
  for the reason above - I've seen enough people to make that conclusion.
  
>There are so many people here, in US, for instance, who will be surprised
>and even shocked at the offer to give or take a copy of software package.

 And very many who will not.  I had that cautiousness, but I 
 figured out that it (possible shock) depends on the environment 
 and your relationship with a particular person. Several times I 
 was offered  varios packages without even asking.

>Well, for my 7 years of being in Soviet computer world (both school, work and
>hobby) I did not find anybody who'd even think about buying of software.

 Indid, there were no software stores and even more - it was hard 
 to pay a person you want to buy a software from (cooperatives
 appeared much later than computers and programmers).

>I know people who were
>going into cybernetics without knowledge that their work can be marketable 
>(and by the way it is the same thing in many other areas of science in USSR).

  Marketing is an absolutely different issue. Even here in the US 
  a good program (or whatever you've done) won't make you rich 
  unless properly marketed. You need to be "a right person at 
  the right time in the right place" - as it happened with Bill (?)
  Gates - besides the very fact that you have something to offer.

>Software is knowledge.

  No. First of all it's a work and time.  Second, it's a product.

> Selling software means keeping monopoly on knowledge.
>Means preventing somebody from knowing things. 

  Not true.  From the consumer point of view, software is no different
  from food and other goods - all involve somebodies labor. If you use
  the labor you should (will you or not - it's another point) pay for
  it. Using your logic one can say that selling food (well, in some
  instances software is a food - you can't do anything without a certain
  package) "means preventing somebody" from eating. True. So what?
  Can't afford - don't eat. Or steal, as it widely done in xSU :-)

> And it is despite the fact
>that a person who created software, for instance, received his/her knowledge
>for free or at much lower cost (Did anybody sell that 2+2=4 ?)

 Not true again - a person who knew that 2+2=4 and was able to
 implement that knowledge put his labor into the product, thus
 increasing the cost of that 2+2.  You see, the things you're 
 talking about are very close to that of soviet pricing/paying
 system - soviets always thought that labor costs nothing.
 I always wonder, that a woman who makes a Vologda lace 
 (the cost of raw material is negligible) can not afford to buy
 her production in a store.  
 It might be sligtly differnt with computers though, because
 besides the knowledge of 2+2 you'd need at least a keyboard
 and the attached hardware, e.g. a computer which costs 
 considerable amount of money, and, in case of programmers, 
 you need some software tools, like compilers.
 

>  And still, does anybody in the nets know what happened to old soviet/e.euro-
>pean computers?  Some of them had pretty good potential.

 Potential still remains just a potential. In case of "microsha" -
 it was born dead mainly because of the custom design and the choice 
 of the CPU (8080).  DVKs were able to survive in closed market -
 until IBM clones filled the country - even XT beats them up 
 with their customized RT-11 like OS and most important - completely
 absent storage devices, i.e. hard drives, and inherently small
 memory - 256 K with some sort of memory management unit, however
 I'm not certain that even that was implemented.
 The only reasonable choice, but it was a choice for hardware hackers,
 that I know of was a Sinclair type computer. Unfortunately, only
 one factory produced it in very small quantities, so it's hard
 to talk about using the computer in "every home".
 

>S privetom,
>Timur