By
Charles Cooper, CNET News.com
17/05/2005
URL:
http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/editorialdesk/0,,39230533,00.htm
commentary
The '60s represent many things to many people, but did that
same era of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll also inspire the revolution in
personal computing?
That remains an unconventional reading of contemporary history. You
could just as easily argue that heavy investment in military research
was the moving force. Same goes for pro-market tax policies. But a
generation of pot smokers and draft dodgers?
Needless to say, it has the makings of a feisty barroom debate.
Still, don't dismiss the argument out of hand. In fact, Whole Earth
Catalog founder Stewart Brand made a convincing try a decade ago.
In an essay
he wrote for Time magazine in 1995, Brand maintained that the communal
and libertarian outlook espoused during the hippie era spawned the
seeds that later bore fruit in the form of the modern cyberrevolution.
"At the time, it all seemed dangerously anarchic (and still does to
many), but the counterculture's scorn for centralized authority
provided the philosophical foundations of not only the leaderless
Internet but also the entire personal-computer revolution."
He wasn't talking about Vint Cerf doing bong loads. You can
easily get lost in the caricatures of the counterculture's sometimes
perverse opposition to authority and entirely miss the point. In fact,
that very willingness to challenge convention led to leaps of
imagination that got repackaged into a furious assault on mainframe
centralization.
Power to the people = popular access to computers? Actually,
it's not such a stretch. But how did the pieces fall into place?
Explaining that is the hard task, and it's one ably taken up by John
Markoff in "What the Dormouse Said: How the '60s Counterculture Shaped
the Personal Computer Industry." Markoff, a Silicon Valley
correspondent for The New York Times, has produced a fascinating read,
uncovering the many threads that connected the counterculture with the
pioneering computer research later carried out just south of San
Francisco.
Why history works out the way it does always makes for a good
story, especially when the outcome is unexpected. By rights, the East
Coast should have bested the West Coast in the computer competition.
The East Coast computing axis, which ran from just north of New York
City, where IBM housed its headquarters, up to Cambridge and the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was rich in talent, money and
pedigree. But as Markoff recounts, most of the groundbreaking research
was getting done in California.
"The East Coast computing culture didn't get it. The old computing world was hierarchical and conservative."
He's got that right. In a certain sense, the East Coast
establishment was a victim of its own success. Unfortunately, it was
also blind to the future because it had such an entrenched interest in
the preservation of the status quo. Ken Olson, the founder of Digital
Equipment Corp. and a leading figure of the East Coast computer
establishment, once famously quipped in public that there was no need
for a home PC. But the outside world was changing, and DEC would later
pay the price for its management's myopia.
Meanwhile, Northern California had attracted the talents of
brilliant thinkers such as Doug Engelbart, Fred Moore, Alan Kay and Ted
Nelson--not to mention the sundry hobbyists who belonged to the now
legendary Homebrew Computer Club.
The contrast between the West Coast and the Old Guard back East was
stark--in some cases a parody of the difference between the two coasts.
IBM was famous for sending its employees out into the business world
with pressed suits and white shirts as mandatory battle fatigues. What
would they have thought had they known their future nemeses were
dropping serious amounts of acid?
LSD was hardly verboten. Just the opposite. Long before Ken
Kesey's electric Kool-Aid acid tests, Engelbart belonged to a small
band of computer researchers who tried LSD to test whether they could
enhance their creative powers with psychedelic drugs. It's unclear
whether this paved the way for later technology breakthroughs.
(Engelbart was sufficiently inspired by one of his LSD trips to think
up a training toy to teach little boys to urinate properly.)
Like the founding generation that led the United States to
independence, this was a special cadre of thinkers and doers. Was their
zeal fired by the '60s counterculture? Or was it due to sheer dumb luck
that a collection of special talents came together at exactly the same
time in exactly the same place? It's an argument that will go on for
quite a long time.
biography
Charles Cooper is the executive editor of commentary at CNET News.com.