The spectre of the machine
Authors: Kathryn Ptacek
Venue: Proceedings of the 7th annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User services (1979)

There exists a psychological fear of computers and that fear is expressed in the literature of our society. The basis of this fear, viewed in three related aspects, is the populace's misunderstanding of the machine's function and abilities and capabilities. Literature is the double mirror of society. It reflects the attitudes, trends and mores prevalent in our society. This is the Mirror of Reality. There exists a second mirror, however, the Mirror of Illusion and it is this mirror which proves dangerous to our computing Don Quixote. This is the literature reflecting our fears, our superstitions, our anxious thoughts on tomorrow's society. This mirror distorts. And, unfortunately, distortion, being of nature more interesting than simple reality, is regarded as fact by the main body of our society. Our Mirror of Illusion is largely built of the sands of misunderstanding -- the fear of the machine's function and abilities. This has been a popular theme in literature for almost a century now, and can be traced through three aspects. Yet we do not have a convenient Dr. Carrasco to hold up the Mirror of Reality for society to evaluate. Rather we must ask ourselves if User Services can serve in this capacity. The first aspect of this fear is the apprehension of the future and the anxiety about the unknown. As expressed in E. M. Forster's (1879-1970) short story, "The Machine Stops," the fear is that human beings will grow totally dependent upon the machine for all their needs, physical, emotional and mental, and that man will lose his initiative. If the machine fails, what then of man? In the futuristic time of this story the people, having lost all creativity and initiative, no longer move from their control chairs -- a chair designed with a panel of buttons. The buttons summon valet service, communications, and in that isolated world the machine is their servant, yet they have become enslaved to it. The second aspect is the confrontation between man and machine become sentient. In Arthur C. Clarke's novel, 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Hal computer goes rogue and has virtual control over the lives of the men with whom it had previously worked. It even commits the ultimate crime against mankind -- "Hal" kills a man to protect its reign, an action negating Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. However, this computer is not yet all-powerful, and man does triumph. Here too is the personification of the computer (called Hal and possessing a human-like voice) as an individual living entity with likes and dislikes. The computer that cannot be stopped is the third aspect in the development of the fear of computers. In D. F. Jones' novel, Colossus: The Forbin Project, the computer becomes omnipotent and omniscient and takes control of people's daily lives, thus completing the circle of the machine as an all-knowing, all-powerful god image expressed in the "The Machine Stops." Colossus remains an "it" and it, too, commits the ultimate crime -- it murders humans, threatens them, invades their privacy, manipulates their lives, thus stripping away their humanity. This opponent of fear and anxiety, half-truths and myths is a powerful one for User Services to face. Yet face this giant we must. But how? Obviously, we cannot destroy the books, nor can we erase these concepts from the minds of the populace. What then should we do? Several suggestions are offered below. --The staff of User Services must view itself as an educator. The public must be educated and shown that the computer is not all-powerful, that it is basically stupid, that it is man-made, man-controlled, man-operated, and thus fallible, susceptible to the errors and eccentricities of man. Special emphasis must be given to the fact that the computer is not alive, that it is not a person, that it is not a he or a she. It is simply an "it." --In that capacity what may be accomplished? Classes informing the public of the capabilities -- and limitations -- of computers should be arranged. These should without fail be small and informal, always stressing the personal touch, rather than the impersonal, which is identified with the facelessness of the computer. --Open Houses should be organized. These should be held at the university computing centers to show the interested public the offices and work areas of the staff, the hardware of the computer. Here also is the ideal time to stress the simplicity of the computer. Informally instruct the public in a few basic terminal commands; allow them to sit down and work with it, perhaps even play some computer games. Let them see that the computer can be fun; that it needn't be menacing. Also show that the machine can "draw" pictures and "write" poetry -- something that is "artistic" cannot be all bad. Yet obviously it is not the quality artwork or creativity of a human -- no fear should be aroused on that point. --Have traveling groups go out into the schools, from elementary level through senior high school. These groups would show the children the usefulness of the computer -- how it frees people from tedious and repetitious chores, allowing them more free time for creative, thoughtful work. User Services must also emphasize that the computer will not do "everything" for humans, nor will it take jobs away from humans. Small dial-up terminals could be taken to the schools, so that the students could see the assessibility and simplicity involved in basic computing. --Above all, the staff of User Services must act as a translator for both computing personnel and the public at large. Computing vocabulary is comprised largely of bewildering acronyms, annoying buzz words, borrowed and redefined words -- little of it understood by the citizen in the street. And nothing is designed to alienate someone faster than the seemingly insurmountable barrier of language. To the computer layperson computerese appears completely unlearnable. Yet, many computer words have already slipped into our daily language: input, output, downtime, bug, turnaround, database and default, among many others. In this area User Services fits in well, for it must work with both the public and with the programmers, and thus must understand and be facile with both languages. Thus, in the long run, User Services must serve in two capacities: as educator and translator. There is no easy solution to this problem of misunderstanding and fear. It cannot be solved overnight, perhaps not even in a decade. People will not suddenly realize the computer is dumb, a handy tool and not all-encompassing. But rather than allowing this ignorance toward computers to continue to grow, User Services must stem the flow of fear and misunderstanding, be a dam to distortion. In the end, User Services must show the public the two mirrors, the one of the Illusion, the other of Reality. And the Mirror of Illusion must be shattered. Ultimately, User Services must serve as intermediary between man and machine.