Burroughs & adding machines

From: John Lawson <jpl15_at_panix.com>
Date: Mon Jan 7 01:14:21 2002

On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Glen Goodwin wrote:

> > From: John Lawson <jpl15_at_panix.com>

[snip]

>
> I certainly don't mean to question your word, but can you provide specific
> references?
>

  Please, no problem! Kinda like 'peer-review' in scientific-journal-land!

  I have (somewhere) a Burroughs internal publication that outlines points
of company history, in there is the article I'm refering to. It is packed
away just now, but in a couple of months I'll have my library out of the
boxes and back on the shelves, Insh'Allah!


> Material published by William S. Burroughs (references available upon
> request) indicate that the problem was that *exactly* the proper amount of
> pressure had to be applied to the actuator lever in order to produce a
> correct result, which was nearly impossible. The hydraulic piston ensured
> that the same force was delivered to the machine no matter how much
> pressure was applied (as long as it was enough to depress the lever). This
> gave the Burroughs machine a huge advantage over competing products
> (several of which existed at the time and all had the same problem), and
> allowed it to capture the market.
>

  Well, okay, I think we're describing the same symptom from slightly
different viewpoints. My reference specifically mentions machine damage
as a result of improper crank use; it is undoubtedly also the case that
inaccurate results would also devolve from this; and in fact that would be
far more serious a situation, since, in the case of gross mechanical
failure, you at least know to check your results - because your desk is
suddenly littered with oily springs and bent levers...

  crunch sproingggg (turn-of-last-century expletives deleted)




> > Now, just a sec, I wanna check my spelling, grammar, syntax,
> > orthography, references, style, Flesch Rating, ....
>
> No shit, this list is a real shark tank these days when it comes to
> precision in expression ;>)
>

 And I must place myself in that Group; faddish moronic mangling of
English evokes my very strong underlying concern over the precipitous
slide of overall American educational standards, the fact that
ever-more-stupid teachers continue the downward spiral, and the
market-driven grotesque Deification of vulgar pop-culture fueled by
billions of indiscriminate young dollars. Most often I just delete %99 of
the Beavis-and-Butthead stuff I see, but occasionally I simply wish to
raise a little flag in the gathering Storm of Dumb.

  Now: contrast the above with the fact that, as my years advance (nearly
50) I find it increasingly more difficult to type without falling into
egregious and repeated errors, mainly right-left handed letter
transposition errors, and spelling errors that go undetected because I
'see' the word I *meant* to type instead of what actually came off the
keyboard. I am using Pine under a Unix shell, (and have turned off my
main wordprocessor spell checkers) in an effort to force myself to pay
more attention. As well, I don't touch-type, I use four or five fingers
and watch the keys, not the screen. I've tried several time to *learn*
touch-typing; all that generates is smashed keyboards and frustration.

 And, back in the day, I could do 45 or 50 WPM consistently, and hardly
make a mistake. Now, my geriatric throughput is... um.... uh, what were
we talking about?

;}

  So: I can cast the stones up in the air and let them land on me, too.

Cheers

John
Received on Mon Jan 07 2002 - 01:14:21 GMT