I read Silicon Snake Oil soon after it was published (1996) and I felt Cliff Stoll's views were excessively pessimistic at the time. He was definitely out of tune with the Dot Com Zeitgeist. But a quarter of a century later he might be experiencing a degree of Schadenfreude.
Computers have still not successfully replaced newspapers.
Computers have still not successfully replaced teachers.
Computers have still not changed the way government works.
Computer technology has undoubtedly had enormous effects on many aspects of society but it has failed to produce benefits that many early technology idealists and entrepreneurs predicted, and it has made some things a lot worse.
We have lost the quality journalism that was nurtured by the old broadsheet newspapers because they no longer have the necessary money nor inclination to do it.
Education systems are in decline everywhere. Teacher quality has declined. The best teachers find jobs outside the education systems. Student performance has declined despite vast investments in technology for education. Student attention spans have declined and mental health problems have greatly increased along with increased exposure to technology.
Governments at least have benefited from technology in that has enabled mass surveillance and control of their citizens. But other areas of government administration for public benefit, such as health administration and education have not improved. Yet governments have wasted vast amounts of taxpayer money in failed technology projects. Wider citizen participation in democracy? Not so much.
What Cliff Stoll seems to have underestimated is people's willingness to put up with cheaper, lower-quality technological alternatives to quality newspapers, good teachers and public administration.
> Computers have still not successfully replaced newspapers.
I never read print newspapers. I do read print magazines.
> Computers have still not successfully replaced teachers
Largely institutional inertia. Those of us who do not send our kids to school have found the technology incredibly useful.
It is also not just a matter of replacing teachers, but greater access to them and how one interacts with them. My daughter has remote tutors, one where I could not find a subject specialist (currently classical civilisation and Latin, previously astronomy, all for GCSEs for those familiar with the British system) easily near where we live. She is set and submits work online. She is doing an online course for another subject with assignments marked by a tutor.
My older daughter's school (college for A levels) made good use of technology, particularly during lockdown, but also before that. Her university seems to use a lot of remote assessments and submission of assignments etc. (I do not know how well though).
> Computer technology has undoubtedly had enormous effects on many aspects of society but it has failed to produce benefits that many early technology idealists and entrepreneurs predicted, and it has made some things a lot worse.
I agree. That is why the middle aged of us here are so cynical. We saw the promise and feel cheated.
> We have lost the quality journalism that was nurtured by the old broadsheet newspapers because they no longer have the necessary money nor inclination to do it.
That is also because people are too lazy to look for alternatives. There are blogs by experts in every field. You can get your economic analysis for an economist, your foreign news from people in other countries.
Do not get overly nostalgic for old broadsheets - the lack of diversity of sources also meant their errors and sloppiness was never spotted by most people. Gell-Mann amnesia was rampant.
> Education systems are in decline everywhere. Teacher quality has declined. The best teachers find jobs outside the education systems.
I do not think that can be blamed on technology. We have that problem in the UK, and it is clear to me that the biggest problem is the tendency to manage by target setting. League tables and metrics dominate. Teachers leave because they hate the working environment and cannot do their jobs properly.
> Governments at least have benefited from technology in that has enabled mass surveillance and control of their citizens. But other areas of government administration for public benefit, such as health administration and education have not improved. Yet governments have wasted vast amounts of taxpayer money in failed technology projects. Wider citizen participation in democracy? Not so much
Governments do not necessarily want what citizens want. Politicians have one set of values, civil servants another. The big influential groups (media and big business) have yet another set of interests. None are aligned with what the population at large want (even when their is a consensus) nor their interests.
Computers have still not successfully replaced newspapers. Computers have still not successfully replaced teachers. Computers have still not changed the way government works.
Computer technology has undoubtedly had enormous effects on many aspects of society but it has failed to produce benefits that many early technology idealists and entrepreneurs predicted, and it has made some things a lot worse.
We have lost the quality journalism that was nurtured by the old broadsheet newspapers because they no longer have the necessary money nor inclination to do it.
Education systems are in decline everywhere. Teacher quality has declined. The best teachers find jobs outside the education systems. Student performance has declined despite vast investments in technology for education. Student attention spans have declined and mental health problems have greatly increased along with increased exposure to technology.
Governments at least have benefited from technology in that has enabled mass surveillance and control of their citizens. But other areas of government administration for public benefit, such as health administration and education have not improved. Yet governments have wasted vast amounts of taxpayer money in failed technology projects. Wider citizen participation in democracy? Not so much.
What Cliff Stoll seems to have underestimated is people's willingness to put up with cheaper, lower-quality technological alternatives to quality newspapers, good teachers and public administration.