*

I’m fascinated so far by the posts by James Ascher, Eric Izant, and Kyle Bickoff - all members of our Media Archaeology Lab working group dedicated to thinking through how to catalog the MAL’s holdings. All three propose similar but also slightly different approaches to cataloging the MAL’s holdings by drawing on a set of descriptive terms – most of which seem to overlap with metadata terms defined by Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.

Eric and Kyle suggest we use the following categories:

• title
• date received
• publication date
• publication medium
• publication format
• author
• publisher
• identification number
• language
• system of use
• operating description/instructions
• photograph of the item
• brief description of the item
• notations about whether and when the item has been tested

At first glance, all these descriptive categories seem like perfectly pragmatic and effective ways to describe many of the items in the MAL – from its manuals, books, magazines, to its collection of hardware, software, games, and digital literature/art. I couldn’t have come up with a more complete list myself. However, the moment I try to actually put this system into practice and describe any one item in the lab, I’m immediately confounded by this apparently straightforward system.

Take, for example, this 5.25″ floppy that was donated to the lab by Canadian poet Lionel Kearns.

Before donating them to the lab, Kearns had in his possession these two floppies which contain the Apple BASIC code for bpNichol’s famous, early digital poem, “FIRST SCREENING” from 1983-1984. However, Kearns included a letter with the donation in which he explains that these are something like “manuscript floppies” in that they pre-date the publication of “FIRST SCREENING” in 1984. It turns out that while the differences between this verion of “FIRST SCREENING” and the version that Jim Andrews et al have made available online are not immediately apparent, the code for the two versions is very different. Just one example is that the published version contains a work called “Off-screen Romance” that’s only visible if one looks at line 110 code, read that “110 REM FOR THE CURIOUS VIEWER/READER THERE’S AN ‘OFF-SCREEN ROMANCE’ AT 1749. YOU JUST HAVE TO TUNE IN THE PROGRAMME” after which one can type “RUN 1748″ to make the poem appear on screen. In the earlier version housed in the lab, there is no “Off-screen Romance” at all (and neither is there “Reverie” or “Any of Your Lip”). Thus, just some of the questions this piece raises are:

• what is the title? is it what’s written on the label of the floppy by Kearns? or what the piece was later known as? but then how do we distinguish between this version and the published version?
• we can certainly say what date we received this item, but there is no publication date for these floppies and no publisher; in fact, we don’t even know when bpNichol was working on this earlier version of “FIRST SCREENING”
• while we can say that the medium is a 5.25″ floppy, that the system of use is Apple IIe and Apple BASIC, how do we indicate that this piece is generally known as a digital poem, OR as a work of electronic literature; that it contains 10 poems; that these poems are kinetic; that the published version contains 13 poems; that the Apple IIe had an 80 column display; that this was one of the first computers to have uppercase and lowercase – a fact which has a profound impact on the kind of digital literary art one was able to produce; that it comes with an explanatory letter by Lionel Kearns
• more, the foregoing questions mostly only attend to the floppy disks themselves. What about the machine we use in the MAL to access the floppy? How do we indicate that the machine we use right now is the Platinum Apple IIe that came out in 1987 whose case is now light grey instead of the beige of the original Apple IIe from 1984 which bpNichol would have used? How do we indicate that, for example, the keyboard layout for the Platinum Apple IIe comes with a numeric keypad and the Open and Solid Apple keys of the original have been replaced by Command and Option? Wouldn’t we say that our interactions with the work on the floppy are affected, changed, by the medium of interaction itself?

I think, then, that some of these questions might be the impetus for Jamess suggestions for the following categories to describe items in the lab might :

• Intrinsic (things written on or encoded in the object, not based on ANY external information):
  • Identifying name(s) (most prominent words on the object- usually a model name)
  • Other information- manufacturer, model, year, etc.
  • Physical characteristics, size, color, appearance, distinguishing marks
• Extrinsic:
  • Socially constructed name(s)
  • Explanation for name(s) (trade names? hobbyist names? what they are called on eBay?)
  • Role(s) for various communities
  • Related objects

And so while James’ suggestions might at first seem overly general and not specific enough, I wonder if our desire for categorical specificity isn’t actually driven by book culture – where there is a greater uniformity among objects than in the digital realm where, at least in the 1970s and 1980s, not only is nearly every object (whether hardware or software) unique, but even the notion of “object” is up for debate. What is the object we’re seeking to describe when we look at an Apple Lisa? Its outward appearance, dimensions, keyboard? It’s operating system? Icons? Graphical User Interface? Or what about the original owner’s files? Now the Apple Lisa starts to seem like its “object” all the way down and instead of coming up with a new schema to describe it, might we be better off using broad, flexible terms that allow us to provide pragmatic user-friendly descriptions within the terms?

Nowadays, while there are a few more choices for browsers and still many reasons to be concerned about how our experience of the Web is being framed for us, search engine algorithms are the new, more obvious information gatekeepers. In fact, the 21st century version of Internet Explorer’s monopoly is now so obvious that it’s nearly no longer noticeable, for when we search for data on the Web we are no longer “searching” – instead, we are “Googling.” And so, in line with what Siva Vaidhyanathan calls “The Googlization of Everything,” a new mode of writing is emerging that I call (in the postscript to my book Reading Writing Interfaces) “readingwriting”: the practice of writing through the network, which, as it tracks, indexes, and algorithmizes every click and every bit of text we enter into the network, constantly reads our writing and writes our reading. This strange blurring of, even feedback loop between, reading and writing, quite simply signals the end of literature as we’ve known it. It is the Googlization of literature. And readingwriters (such as Darren Wershler, Bill Kennedy, Tan Lin, and John Cayley/Daniel Howe) who experiment with/on Google are not simply pointing to its ubiquity; they are implicitly questioning how it works, how it generates the results it does, and so how it sells ourselves and our language back to us.

The impetus of this literary critique of Google is clearly aligned with that of early works of net art such as the “Web Stalker” from 1997 – an experimental web browser or piece of “speculative software” created by the art collective I/O/D (consisting of Simon Pope, Colin Green, and Matthew Fuller). “Web Stalker” essentially turns the web inside-out, presenting the viewer/navigator with the html code of a given page and all links leading to and from the page are presented to the viewer as a visualization. It is an artistic tool for drawing attention to the limits and possibilities of a particular reading/writing interface, the web browser. As co-creator Colin Green put it in a 1998 interview with Geert Lovink, “[b]rowsers made by the two best-known players frame most peoples’ experience of the web. This is a literal framing. Whatever happens within the window of Explorer, for instance, is the limit of possibility.” The foregoing is then followed up by Matthew Fuller’s clarification that “Web Stalker” “is not setting itself as a universal device, a proprietary switching system for the general intelligence, but a sensorium – a mode of sensing, knowing and doing on the web that makes its propensities – and as importantly, some at least of those ‘of the web’ that were hitherto hidden – clear.”

Since “Web Stalker” was created sixteen years ago, and runs only on Windows 95 and Mac Classic OS (which in turn usually requires an equally obsolete dialup connection), it’s fairly difficult to get it running and there are also very few high quality images available of it online. Thankfully, Matthew Fuller generously provided me with images which I’m making available here. If you have the technical know-how, you can still download “Web Stalker” here and get it to write a reading of the Web like you’ve never seen before…or at least, not seen since the late 90s.

It’s an honor indeed to announce that Judy Malloy, a true pioneer of hypertext and electronic literature broadly, has donated a set of floppies as well as documentation to the Media Archaeology Lab. To give you a sense of her contributions to the field, I’ve excerpted the following from her longer, more fascinating biography, on her website:

Her work as a pioneer on the Internet and in electronic literature began after cataloguing, designing and programming information systems in the late mid and late sixties, at the time when library information systems designers were among the first to utilize computers to access information, and futurists were envisioning their use in the humanities. She began creatively using narrative information in artists books in the late seventies and early eighties and then, with a vision of nonsequential literature, wrote and programmed Uncle Roger – one of the first (if not the first) works of hypertext literature — on Art Com Electronic Network in the Well. (1986-1988) In the following years, she created a series of innovative literary works that run on computer platforms and were published by Eastgate and on the Internet. In 1993, she was invited to Xerox PARC where she worked in CSL (Computer Science Laboratory) as the first artist in their artist-in-residence program. Judy Malloy created one of the first arts websites, Making Art Online, (1993-1994) originally commissioned in collaboration with the ANIMA site in Vancouver (CSIR/Western Front) and currently hosted on the website of the Walker Art Center. l0ve0ne, written and coded in 1994, was the first selection in the Eastgate Web Workshop. A complete collection of her papers and software is archived in the Judy Malloy Papers at the David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library at Duke University.

Below is Malloy’s packing list of the works she has generously donated to the lab – I will soon test all the floppies and will add notes here as to their functionality. Enjoy and, as always, the MAL welcomes visiting researchers!

*

Disk labeled “molasses”
Malloy’s 1988 Hypercard Stack Molasses.

Judy Malloy, Molasses, Berkeley, CA, 1988. (for MacIntosh Computers HyperCard – produced at the Whole Earth Review under sponsorship of Apple Computers) – Exhibited in the traveling exhibition Art Com Software at Tisch School of the Arts, New York University, NYC, NY, 1988 and other places.

Judy Malloy, its name was Penelope, 1990.
This is probably a PC disk and an interim version between the 1989 exhibition version and the more formally packaged 1991 version, which was distributed by Art Com software.

Judy Malloy, its name was Penelope. Eastgate Systems, 1993
This was Eastgate’s first version, published on disk for both Macs and PCs.  The disk is signed and actually says 1992.  This copy was my Mother’s copy which is why there is a label that says Barbara Powers in it. Note that the pages in these early editions stuck together

Judy Malloy, Wasting Time, Penelope, Uncle Roger
It looks as if all three of these works are on the disk.  It was probably a disk I used to send around the works for exhibition consideration and is probably a PC disk.  Wasting Time was published as follows: Judy Malloy, “Wasting Time”, A Narrative Data Structure”, After the Book (Perforations 3) Summer, 1992.

Judy Malloy and Cathy Marshall, Forward Anywhere  Eastgate Systems, 1996.
This is a disk version.  It was published in both Mac and PC versions, but this is probably a PC version. A second version was published with a CD

James Johnson, Second Thoughts, 1989.
Distributed by Art Com Software. He sent me a couple of copies, and I gave the other one to my archives at Duke.

Documentation  Folders

Bad Information Base #1
This is the first work of computer-mediated text that I created.  Note that it is not the Bad Information Base #2 which was created ion ACEN later in 1986. Bad Information Base #1 is documented in Judy Malloy, “OK Research/OK Genetic Engineering/Bad Information, Information Art Defines Technology”, Leonardo 21(4): 371 – 375, 1988  It is explained in the May 1986 documentation in the folder. Basically, I made the database and then sent out cards to the mail art network.  When the cards were returned, I ran a search and then sent a printout to the requester. In addition to a documentation sheet, the folder includes a blank search card, an envelope label (it was pasted on to the envelopes) a second edition envelope, a blank letterhead sheet,  and a copy of the accordion fold list of keywords that was sent along with the card. I don’t have a disk of this work available, but Duke has printouts and a notebook with copies of the completed search cards.

Uncle Roger
A documentation sheet for A Party in Woodside, 1987

This was probably included with the 1987 version of A Party in Woodside which was self published and distributed by Art Com

An instruction booklet that was included in the packaging to the Apple II version of Uncle Roger which contained all three files. This version was probably published (self published by Bad Information) in 1988 and was distributed by Art Com.

Its name was Penelope
Documentation for the exhibition version.

A flyer advertising the version for the self-published (Narrabase Press) version  that was available from Art Com.

Unassembled packing for the Narrabase Press version. The 3 pieces inside the watercolor paper folder are a cover, a back cover page and instructions. These pieces were pasted onto folder watercolor paper and a pocket that I constructed inside the folded watercolor paper contained a disk. An unassembled disk cover is also included.  The whole when assembled was enclosed in a heavy clear plastic sleeve.

Molasses
This folder contains a few Xeroxes or printouts of screens from Molasses, one of which has instructions for reading the work.

Wasting Time
A documentation sheet for Wasting Time.

I’m very keen to see what Joel comes up with as I am fascinated with some of the keyboards in the lab, including an original keyboard for the Apple Macintosh from 1984 which famously has no arrow keys so that users were forced to use the mouse.

As I’ve written elsewhere on this blog, the lab also has Commodore 64 computers which for example, came with both a ‘Commodore’ key that gave the user access to an alternate character set as well as four programmable function keys that, with the shift button, could each be programmed for two different functions.

By contrast, Apple II computers came with two programmable function keys and Apple III, IIc and IIe computers came with open-Apple and closed-Apple keys that provided the user with shortcuts to applications such as cut-and-paste or copy.

I hope this is the first of many more artist residencies in the lab!

You can find the entirety of the interview with Ernst here. As always, comments welcome.

Wolfgang Ernst’s Media Archaeological Fundus

*

“Knowledge is power: information is the fabric of knowledge; the controller of information wields power.”
–”Some Laws of Personal Computing,” Byte 1979 (Lewis 191)

“If a system is to serve the creative spirit, it must be entirely comprehensible to a single individual…Any barrier that exists between the user and some part of the system will eventually be a barrier to creative expression. Any part of the system that cannot be changed or that is not sufficiently general is a likely source of impediment.”
–”Design Principles Behind Smalltalk,” Byte 1981(Ingalls 286)

My talk today is concerned with a decade in which we can track the shift from seeing a user-friendly computer as a tool that, through a graphical user interface (GUI), encourages understanding, tinkering, and creativity to seeing a user-friendly computer that uses a GUI to create an efficient work-station for productivity and task-management and the effect of this shift particularly on digital literary production. The turn from computer systems based on the command-line interface to those based on “direct manipulation” interfaces that are iconic or graphical was driven by rhetoric that insisted the GUI, particularly that pioneered by the Apple Macintosh design team, was not just different from the command-line interface but it was naturally better, easier, friendlier. The Macintosh was, as Jean-Louis Gassée (who headed up its development after Steve Jobs’s departure in 1985) writes without any hint of irony, “the third apple,” after the first apple in the Old Testament and the second apple that was Isaac Newton’s, “the one that widens the paths of knowledge leading toward the future.”

Despite studies released since 1985 that clearly demonstrate GUIs are not necessarily better than command-line interfaces in terms of how easy they are to learn and to use, Apple – particularly under Jobs’ leadership – successfully created such a convincing aura of inevitable superiority around the Macintosh GUI that to this day the same “user-friendly” philosophy, paired with the no longer noticed closed architecture, fuels consumers’ religious zeal for Apple products. I have been an avid consumer of Apple products since I owned my first Macintosh Powerbook in 1995; but what concerns me is that ‘user-friendly’ now takes the shape of keeping users steadfastly unaware and uninformed about how their computers, their reading/writing interfaces, work let alone how they shape and determine their access to knowledge and their ability to produce knowledge. As Wendy Chun points out, the user-friendly system is one in which users are, on the one hand, given the ability to “map, to zoom in and out, to manipulate, and to act” but the result is a “seemingly sovereign individual” who is mostly a devoted consumer of ready-made software and ready-made information whose framing and underlying mechanisms we are not privy to.

However, it’s not necessarily the GUI per se that is responsible for the creation of Chun’s “seemingly sovereign individual” but rather a particular philosophy of computing and design underlying a model of the GUI that has become the standard for nearly all interface design. The earliest example of a GUI-like interface whose philosophy is fundamentally different from that of the Macintosh is Douglas Engelbart’s NLS or “oN-Line System” which he began work on in 1962 and famously demonstrated in 1968. While his “interactive, multi-console computer-display system” with keyboard, screen, mouse, and something he called a chord handset is commonly cited as the originator of the GUI, Engelbart wasn’t so much interested in creating a user-friendly machine as he was invested in “augmenting human intellect”. As he first put it in 1962, this augmentation meant “increasing the capability of a man to approach a complex problem situation, to gain comprehension to suit his particular needs, and to derive solutions to problems”. The NLS was not about providing users with ready-made software and tools from which they choose or consume but rather it was about bootstrapping, or “the creation of tools for expert computer users” and providing the means for users to create better tools, or tools better suited for their own individual needs. We can see this emphasis on tool-building and customization that comes out of an augmented intellect in Engelbart’s provision of “view-control” (which allows users to determine how much text they see on the screen as well as the form of that view) and “chains of views” (which allows the user to link related files) in his document editing program.

Underlining the fact that the history of computing is resolutely structured by stops, starts, and ruptures rather than a series of linear firsts, in the year before Engelbart gave his “mother of all demos,” Seymour Papert and Wally Feurzeig began work on a learning-oriented programming language they called ‘Logo’ that was explicitly for children but implicitly for learners of all ages. Throughout the 1970s Papert and his team at MIT conducted research with children in nearby schools as they tried to create a version of Logo that was defined by “modularity, extensibility, interactivity, and flexibility”. At this time, the Apple II was the most popular home computer throughout the late 1970s until the mid-1980s and, given its open architecture, in 1977 Logo licensed a public version for Apple II computers as well as for the less popular Texas Instruments TI 99/4. In 1980, Papert published the decidedly influential Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas in which he makes claims about the power of computers that are startling for a contemporary readership steeped in an utterly different notion of what accessible or user-friendly computing might mean. Describing his vision of “computer-aided instruction” in which “the child programs the computer” rather than one in which the child adapts to the computer or even is taught by the computer, Papert asserts that they thereby “embark on an exploration about how they themselves think…Thinking about thinking turns the child into an epistemologist, an experience not even shared by most adults” (19). And two years later, in a February 1982 issue of Byte magazine, Logo is advertised as a general-purpose tool for thinking with a degree of intellectuality rare for any advertisement: “Logo has often been described as a language for children. It is so, but in the same sense that English is a language for children, a sense that does not preclude its being ALSO a language for poets, scientists, and philosophers”. Moreoever, for Papert thinking about thinking by way of programming happens largely when the user encounters bugs in the system and has to then identify where the bug is to then remove it: “One does not expect anything to work at the first try. One does not judge by standards like ‘right – you get a good grade’ and ‘wrong – you get a bad grade.’ Rather one asks the question: ‘How can I fix it?’ and to fix it one has first to understand what happened in its own terms.” (101) Learning through doing, tinkering, experimentation, trial-and-error is, then, how one comes to have a genuine computer literacy.

In the year after Papert et al began work on Logo and the same year as Engelbart’s NLS demo, Alan Kay also commenced work on the never-realized Dynabook, produced as an “interim Dynabook” in 1972 in the form of the GUI-based Xerox Alto which could also run the Smalltalk language. Kay thereby introduced the notion of “personal dynamic media” for “children of all ages” which “could have the power to handle virtually all of its owner’s information-related needs”. Kay, then, along with Engelbart and Papert, understood very clearly the need for computing to move from the specialized environment of the research lab and into people’s homes by way of a philosophy of the user-friendly oriented toward the flexible production (rather than rigid consumption) of knowledge. It was a realization eventually shared by the broader computing community for, by 1976, Byte magazine was publishing editorials such as “Homebrewery vs the Software Priesthood” declaring that “the movement towards personalized and individualized computing is an important threat to the aura of mystery that has surrounded the computer for its entire history” (90). And more:

The movement of computers into people’s homes makes it important for us personal systems users to focus our efforts toward having computers do what we want them to do rather than what someone else has blessed for us…When computers move into peoples’ homes, it would be most unfortunate if they were merely black boxes whose internal workings remained the exclusive province of the priests…Now it is not necessary that everybody be a programmer, but the potential should be there…(90).

from “Homebrewery vs the Software Priesthood,” Byte magazine October 1976

It was precisely the potential for programming or simply novice as well as expert use via an open, extensible, and flexible architecture that Engelbart, Papert and Kay sought to build into their models of the personal computer to ensure that home computers did not become “merely black boxes whose internal workings remained the exclusive province of the priests.” By contrast, as Kay later exhorted his readers in 1977, “imagine having your own self-contained knowledge manipulator in a portable package the size and shape of an ordinary notebook”. Designed to have a keyboard, an NLS-inspired “chord” keyboard, mouse, display, and windows, the Dynabook would allow users to realize Engelbart’s dream of a computing device that gave them the ability to create their own ways to view and manipulate information. Rather than the over-determined post-Macintosh GUI computer which has been designed to pre-empt every user’s possible need with the creation of an over-abundance of ready-made tools such that “those who wish to do something different will have to put in considerable effort,” Kay wanted a machine that was “designed in a way that any owner could mold and channel its power to his own needs…a metamedium, whose content would be a wide range of already-existing and not-yet-invented media” (403). More, Kay understood from reading Marshall McLuhan, that the design of this new metamedium was no small matter for the very use of a medium changes an individual’s, a culture’s, thought patterns. Clearly, he wanted thought patterns to move toward a literacy that involved reading and writing in the new medium instead of the unthinking consumption of ready-made tools, for, crucially, “the ability to ‘read’ a medium means you can access materials and tools created by others. The ability to ‘write’ in a medium means you can generate materials and tools for others. You must have both to be literate”.

While Kay envisioned the GUI-like interface of the Dynabook would play a crucial role in realizing this “metamedium,” the Smalltalk software driving this interface was equally necessary. Its goal was “to provide computer support for the creative spirit in everyone” (286). Not surprisingly, Kay and his collaborators began working intensely with children after the creation of Smalltalk-71. Influenced by developmental psychologist Jean Piaget as well as Kay’s own observation of Papert and his colleagues’ use of Logo in 1968, Smalltalk relied heavily on graphics and animation through one particular incarnation of the GUI: the Windows, Icons, Menus, and Pointers (or WIMP) interface. Kay writes that in the course of observing Papert using Logo in schools, he realized that these were children “doing real programming…”:

  …this encounter finally hit me with what the destiny of personal computing really was going to be. Not a personal dynamic vehicle, as in Engelbart’s metaphor opposed to the IBM “railroads”, but something much more profound: a personal dynamic medium. With a vehicle one could wait until high school and give “drivers ed”, but if it was a medium, it had to extend into the world of childhood (“The Early History” 81).

As long as the emphasis in computing was on learning – especially through making and doing – the target demographic was going to be children and as long as children could use the system, then so too could any adult provided they understood the underlying structure, the how and the why, of the programming language. As Kay astutely points out, “…we make not just to have, but to know. But the having can happen without most of the knowing taking place”. And, as he goes on to point out, designing the Smalltalk user interface shifted the purpose of interface design from “access to functionality” to an “environment in which users learn by doing” (84). And so Smalltalk designers didn’t so much completely reject the notion of readymade software so much as they sought to provide the user with a set of software building blocks from which the user could then combine and/or edit to create their own customized system. Or, as Trygve Reenskaug (a visiting Norwegian computer scientist with the Smalltalk group at Xerox PARC in the late 1970s) put it:

 …the new user of a Smalltalk system is likely to begin by using its ready-made  application systems for writing and illustrating documents, for designing aircraft wings, for doing homework, for searching through old court decisions, for composing music, or whatever. After a while, he may become curious as to how his system works. He should then be able to “open up” the application object on the screen to see its component parts and to find out how they work together (166).

With an emphasis on learning and building through an open architecture, Adele Goldberg – co-developer of Smalltalk along with Alan Kay and author of most of the Smalltalk documentation – describes the Smalltalk programming environment in this special issue of Byte as one that set out to defy that of the conventional software development environment as illustrated in Figure 1 below:

Image by Adele Goldberg contrasting the conventional philosophy of software driven by “wizards” in Figure 1 versus that provided by Smalltalk for the benefit of the programmer/user in Figure 2.

The Taj Mahal in Figure 1 “represents a complete programming environment, which includes the tools for developing programs as well as the language in which the programs are written. The users must walk whatever bridge the programmer builds” (Goldberg 18). Figure 2, by contrast, represents a Taj Mahal in which the “software priest” is transformed into one who merely provides the initial shape of the environment which programmers can then modify by building “application kits” or “subsets of the system whose parts can be used by a nonprogrammer to build a customized version of the application” (18). The user or non-programmer, then, is an active builder in dialogue with the programmer instead of a passive consumer of a pre-determined (and perhaps even over-determined) environment.

At roughly the same time as Kay began work on Smalltalk in the early 1970s, he was also involved with the team of designers working on the NLS-inspired Xerox Alto which was developed in 1973 as, again, an “interim Dynabook” with a three-button mouse, a GUI which worked in conjunction with the desktop metaphor, and ran Smalltalk. While only several thousand non-commercially available Altos were manufactured, it was – as team members Chuck Thacker and Butler Lampson believe – probably the first computer explicitly called a “personal computer” because of its GUI and its network capabilities. By 1981, Xerox had designed and produced a commercially available version of the Alto, called the 8010 Star Information System, which was sold along with Smalltalk-based software. But as Jeff Johnson et al point out, the most important connection between Smalltalk and the Xerox Star lay in the fact that Smalltalk could clearly illustrate the compelling appeal of a graphical display that the user accessed via mouse, overlapping windows, and icons (22).

Screenshot of Xerox Star from Jeff Johnson et al’s “The Xerox Star: A Retrospective.”

However, the significance of the Star is partly the indisputable impact it had on the GUI design of first the Apple Lisa and then the Macintosh; its significance is also in the way in which it was clearly labeled a work-station for “business professionals who handle information” rather than a metamedium or a tool for creating or even thinking about thinking. And in fact, the Star’s interface – which was the first commercially available computer born out of work by Engelbart, Papert and Kay that attempted to satisfy both novice and expert users in providing an open, extensible, flexible environment and that also happened to be graphical – was conflicted at its core. While in some ways the Star was philosophically very much in line with the open thinking of Engelbart, Papert, and Kay, in other ways its philosophy as much as its GUI directly paved the way to the closed architecture and consumption-based design of the Macintosh. Take for example the overall design principles of the Star which were aimed at making the system seem “familiar and friendly.”

Easy                             Hard

concrete                     abstract
visible                         invisible
copying                      creating
choosing                    filling in
recognizing               generating
editing                        programming
interactive                 batch

Star designers also avowed to avoid the characteristics they list on the right while adhering to a schema that exemplifies the characteristics listed on the left. While there’s little doubt that ease-of-use was of central importance to Engelbart, Papert and Kay – often brought about through interactivity and making computer operations and commands visible – the avoidance of “creating,” “generating,” or “programming” couldn’t be further from their vision of the future of computing. At the same time as the Star forecloses on creating, generating, and programming through its highly restrictive set of commands in the name of simplicity, it also wants to promote users’ understanding of the system as a whole – although, again, we can see this particular incarnation of the GUI represents the beginning of a shift toward only a superficial understanding of the system. Without a fully open, flexible, and extensible architecture, the home computer becomes less a tool for learning and creativity and more a tool for simply “handling information.”

By contrast, as I’ll now talk about, the Apple Macintosh was clearly designed for consumers, not creators. It was marketed as a democratizing machine when in fact it was democratizing only insofar as it marked a profound shift in personal computing away from the sort of inside-out know-how one needed to create on an Apple II to the kind of perfunctory know-how one needed to navigate the surface of the Macintosh – one that amounts to the kind of knowledge needed to click this or that button. The Macintosh was democratic only in the manner any kitchen appliance is democratic. That said, Apple’s redefinition of the overall philosophy of personal computing exemplifies just one of many reversals that abound in this ten year period from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s. In relation to the crucial change that took place in the mid-1980s from open, flexible, and extensible computing systems for creativity to ones that were closed, transparent, and task-oriented, the way in which the Apple Macintosh was framed from the time of its release in January 1984 represented a near complete purging of the philosophy promoted by Engelbart, Kay, and Papert. This purging of the recent past took place under the guise of Apple’s version of the user-friendly that, among other things, pitted itself against the supposedly “cryptic,” arcane,” “phosphorescent heap” that was the command-line interface as well as, it was implied, any earlier incarnation of the GUI.

However, it’s important to note that, while the Macintosh philosophy purged much of what had come before, it did in fact emerge from the momentum gathering in other parts of the computing industry which were particularly concerned to define standards for the computer interface. Up to this point, personal computers were remarkably different from each other. Commodore 64 computers, for example, came with both a ‘Commodore’ key that gave the user access to an alternate character set as well as four programmable function keys that, with the shift button, could each be programmed for two different functions. By contrast, Apple II computers came with two programmable function keys and Apple III, IIc and IIe computers came with open-Apple and closed-Apple keys that provided the user with shortcuts to applications such as cut-and-paste or copy (in the same way that the contemporary ‘command’ key functions).

No doubt in response to the difficulties this variability posed to expanding the customer base for personal computers, Byte magazine ran a two-part series in October and November 1982 dedicated to the issue of industry standards by way of an introduction to a proposed uniform interface called the “Human Applications Standard Computer Interface” (or HASCI). Asserting the importance of turning the computer into a “consumer product,” author Chris Rutkowski declares that every computer ought to have a “standard, easy-to-use format” that “approaches one of transparency. The user is able to apply intellect directly to the task; the tool itself seems to disappear” (291, 299-300). Of course, a computer that is easy-to-use is entirely desirable; however, at this point ease-of-use is framed in terms of the disappearance of the tool being used in the name of ‘transparency ‘ – which now means usersfwhi can efficiently accomplish their tasks with the help of a glossy surface that shields them from the depths of the computer instead of the earlier notion of ‘transparency’ which referred to a usesr’s ability to open up the hood of the computer to understand directly its inner workings.

Thus, no doubt in a bid to finally produce a computer that realized these ideas and appealed to consumers who are “drivers, not repairmen,” Apple unveiled the Lisa in June 1983 for nearly $10,000 (that’s $23,000 in 2012 dollars) as a cheaper and more user-friendly version of the Xerox Alto/Star which sold for $16,000 in 1981 (which is about $40,000). At least partly inspired by Larry Tesler’s Xerox PARC 1979 demo of the Star to Steve Jobs, the Lisa used a one-button mouse, overlapping windows, pop-up menus, a clipboard, and a trashcan. As Tesler was adamant to point out in a 1985 article on the “Legacy of the Lisa,” it was “the first product to let you drag [icons] with the mouse, open them by double-clicking, and watch them zoom into overlapping windows” (17). The Lisa, then, moved that much closer to the realization of the dream of transparency with, for example, its mode of double-clicking that attempted to have users develop the quick, physical action of double-clicking that bypasses the intellect through physical habit; more, its staggering two 2048K worth of software and three expansion slots also firmly moved it in the direction of a readymade, closed consumer product and definitively away from the Apple II, which, when it was first released in 1977, came with 16K bytes of code and, again, eight expansion slots.

Expansion slots symbolize the direction that computing was to take from the moment the Lisa was released, followed by the release of the Macintosh in January 1984, to the present day. Jeff Raskin, who originally began the Macintosh project in 1979, and Steve Jobs both believed that hardware expandability was one of the primary obstacles in the way of personal computing having a broader consumer appeal. In short, expansion slots made standardization impossible (partly because software writers needed consistent underlying hardware to produce widely functioning products) whereas what Raskin and Jobs both sought was a system which was an “identical, easy-to-use, low-cost appliance computer.” At this point, customization is no longer in the service of building, creating or learning – it is, instead, for using the computer as one would any home appliance and ideally this customization is only possible through software that the user drops into the computer via disk just as they would a piece of bread into a toaster. Predictably, then, the original plan for the Macintosh had it tightly sealed so that the user was only free to use the peripherals on the outside of the machine. While team-member Burrell Smith managed to convince Jobs to allow him to add in slots for users to expand the machine’s RAM, Macintosh owners were still “sternly informed that only authorized dealers should attempt to open the case. Those flouting this ban were threatened with a potentially lethal electric shock”.

That Apple could successfully gloss over the aggressively closed architecture of the Macintosh while at the same time market it as a democratic computer “for the people” marks just one more remarkable reversal from this period in the history of computing. As is clear in the advertisement below that came out in Newsweek Magazine during the 1984 election cycle, the Macintosh computer was routinely touted as embodying the principle of democracy. While it was certainly more affordable than the Lisa (in that it sold for the substantially lower price of $2495), its closed architecture and lack of flexibility could still easily allow one to claim it represented a decidedly undemocratic turn in personal computing.

Thus, 1984 became the year that Apple’s philosophy of the computer-as-appliance, encased in an aesthetically pleasing exterior, flowered into an ideology. We can partly see how their ideology of the user-friendly came to fruition through their marketing campaign which included a series of magazine ads such as the one below—

Advertisement for the Apple Macintosh from the November/December 1984 issue of Newsweek Magazine.

—along with one of the most well-known TV commercials of the late twentieth century.In the case of the latter, Apple takes full advantage of the powerful resonance still carried by George Orwell’s dystopian, post-World War II novel 1984 by reassuring us in the final lines of the commercial that aired on 22 January 1984 that “On January 24th Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ’1984.’”

Apple positions Macintosh, then, as a tool for and of democracy while also pitting the Apple philosophy against a (non-existent) ‘other’ (perhaps communist, perhaps IBM or ‘Big Blue’) who is attempting to oppress us with an ideology of bland sameness. Apple’s ideology, then, “saves us” from a vague and fictional, but no less threatening, Orwellian, and nightmarish ideology. As lines of robot-like people, all dressed in identical grey, shapeless clothing march into the opening scene of the commercial, a narrator of this pre-Macintosh nightmare appears on a screen before them in something that appears to be a propaganda film. We hear, spoken fervently, “Today we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the Information Purification Directives.” And, as Apple’s hammer-thrower then enters the scene, wearing bright red shorts and pursued by soldiers, the narrator of the propaganda film continues:

We have created for the first time in all history a garden of pure ideology, where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests of any contradictory true thoughts. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause. Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion.

And just before the hammer is thrown at the film-screen, causing a bright explosion that stuns the grey-clad viewers, the narrator finally declares, “We shall prevail!” But who exactly is the hammer-thrower-as-underdog fighting against? Who shall prevail – Apple or Big Brother? Who is warring against whom in this scenario and why? In the end, all that matters is that, at this moment, just two days before the official release of the Macintosh, Apple has created a powerful narrative of its unquestionable, even natural superiority over other models of computing that continues well into the twenty-first century. It is an ideology that of course masks itself as such and that is born out of the creation of and then opposition to a fictional, oppressive ideology we users/consumers need to be saved from. In this context, the fervor with which even Macintosh team-members believed in the rightness and goodness of their project is somewhat less surprising as they were quoted in Esquire earnestly declaring, “Very few of us were even thirty years old…We all felt as though we had missed the civil rights movement. We had missed Vietnam. What we had was the Macintosh”.

Even non-fiction accounts of the Macintosh by non-Apple employees could not help but endorse it in as breathless terms as those used by the Macintosh team-members themselves. Steven Levy’s Insanely Great, from 1994, is a document as remarkable for its wholesale endorsement of this new model of personal computing as any of the Macintosh advertisements and guide-books. Recalling his experience seeing a demonstration of a Macintosh in 1983, he writes:

Until that moment, when one said a computer screen “lit up,” some literary license was required…But we were so accustomed to it that we hardly even thought to conceive otherwise. We simply hadn’t seen the light. I saw it that day…By the end of the demonstration, I began to understand that these were things a computer should do. There was a better way (4).

The Macintosh was not simply one of several alternatives – it represented the unquestionably right way for computing. And even at the time of his writing that book, in 1993, he still declares that each time he turns on his Macintosh, he is reminded “of the first light I saw in Cupertino, 1983. It is exhilarating, like the first glimpse of green grass when entering a baseball stadium. I have essentially accessed another world, the place where my information lives. It is a world that one enters without thinking of it…an ephemeral territory perched on the lip of math and firmament” (5). But it is precisely the legacy of the unthinking, invisible nature of the so-called “user-friendly” Macintosh environment that has foreclosed on using computers for creativity and learning and that continues in contemporary multi-touch, gestural, and ubiquitous computing devices such as the iPad and the iPhone whose interfaces are touted as utterly invisible (and so their inner workings are de facto inaccessible).

References

“’1984′ Apple Macintosh Commercial.” Youtube. 27 Aug. 2008. Web. 21 June 2012.

Apple Computer Inc. Apple Human Interface Guidelines: The Apple Desktop Interface. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.

Bardini, Thierry. Bootstrapping: Douglas Engelbart, Coevolution, and the Origins of Personal Computing. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 2000.

Chen, Jung-Wei and Jiajie Zhang. “Comparing Text-based and Graphic User Interfaces for Novice and Expert Users.” AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings Archive. 2007. Web. 14 February 2012.

Chun, Wendy. Programmed Visions: Software and Memory. Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2011.

Engelbart, Douglas. “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework.” in The New Media Reader. Eds. Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort. Boston, MA: MIT UP, 2003. 95-108.

—. “Workstation History and the Augmented Knowledge Workshop.” Doug Engelbart Institute. 2008. Web. 3 April 2011.

—, and William English. “A Research Center for Augmenting Human Intellect.” in The New Media Reader. Eds. Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort. Boston, MA: MIT UP, 2003. 233-246.

Erickson, Thomas D. “Interface and the Evolution of Pidgins: Creative Design for the Analytically Inclined.” In The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. Ed. Brenda Laurel. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1990. 11-16

Gassée, Jean-Louis. The Third Apple: Personal Computers & the Cultural Revolution. San Diego, New York, London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers, 1985.

Goldberg, Adele. “Introducing the Smalltalk-80 System.” Byte 6:8 (August 1981): 14-26.

Hertzfeld, Andy and Steve Capps et al. Revolution in the Valley. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly, 2005.

Ingalls, Daniel. “Design Principles Behind Smalltalk.” Byte 6:8 (August 1981): 286-298.

Johnson, Jeff and Theresa Roberts et al. “The Xerox Star: A Retrospective.” Computer 22:9 (September 1989): 11-29.

Johnson, Steven. Interface Culture: How New Technology Transforms the Way We Create and Communicate. New York: Basic Books, 1997.

Kay, Alan. “The Early History of Smalltalk.” Smalltalk dot org. Web. 5 April 2012.

—. “User Interface: A Personal View.” in The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. Ed. Brenda Laurel. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1990. 191-207.

—, and Adele Goldberg. “Personal Dynamic Media.” in The New Media Reader. Eds. Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort. Boston, MA: MIT UP, 2003. 393-409.

Levy, Steven. Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. 25th Anniversary Edition. New York: O’Reilly Media, 2010.

—. Insanely Great: The Life and Times of Macintosh, the Computer that Changed Everything. New York: Viking, 1994.

Lewis, T.G. “Some Laws of Personal Computing.” Byte 4:10 (October 1979): 186-191.

Linden, Ted, Eric Harslem, Xerox Corporation. Office Systems Technology: A Look Into the World of the Xerox 8000 Series Products: Workstations, Services, Ethernet, and Software Development. Palo Alto, CA: Office Systems Division, 1982.

“LOGO.” Advertisement. Byte 7:2 (February 1982): 255.

Morgan, Chris and Gregg Williams, Phil Lemmons. “An Interview with Wayne Rosing, Bruce Daniels, and Larry Tesler: A Behind-the-scenes Look at the Development of Apple’s Lisa.” Reprinted from Byte magazine 8:2 (February 1983): 90-114. Web. 14 April 2012.

Nelson, Theodor. “Computer Lib / Dream Machines.” The New Media Reader. Eds. Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003. 303-338.

Papert, Seymour. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books, 1980.

Reenskaug, Trygve. “User-Oriented Descriptions of Smalltalk Systems.” Byte 6:8 (August 1981): 148-166.

Reimer, Jeremy. “Total share: 30 years of personal computer market share figures.” Ars Technica. 2006. Web. 4 December 2011.

Rutkowski, Chris. “An Introduction to the Human Applications Standard Computer Interface: Part 1: Theory and Principles.” Byte 7:10 (October 1982): 291-310.

—. “An Introduction to the Human Applications Standard Computer Interface: Part 2: Implementing the HASCI Concept. ” Byte 7:11 (November 1982): 379-390.

Smith, David Canfield and Charles Irby et al. “Designing the Star User Interface.” Byte 7:4 (April 1982): 242-282.

Tesler, Larry. “The Legacy of the Lisa.” Macworld magazine (September 1985): 17-22.

Wardrip-Fruin, Noah. “Introduction.” “A Research Center for Augmenting Human Intellect.” By Douglas Engelbart. in The New Media Reader. Eds. Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort. Boston, MA: MIT UP, 2003. 231-232.

“What is Logo?” The Logo Foundation. 2011. Web. 5 April 2012.

Whiteside, John and Sandra Jones, Paul S. Levy, Dennis Wixon. “User Performance with Command, Menu, and Iconic Interfaces.” CHI 1985 Proceedings. April 1985. 185-191.

Wilber, Mike and David Fylstra. “Homebrewery vs the Software Priesthood.” Byte 14 (October 1976): 90-94.

Williams, Gregg. “The Lisa Computer System: Apple Designs a New Kind of Machine.” Product Description. Byte 8:2 (February 1983): 33-50.

Wozniak, Steve. “The Apple-II.” System Description. Byte 2:5 (May 1977): 34-43.

Download the pdf here.

This lovely oddity arrived in the mail yesterday – Bob Neill’s Book of Typewriter Art (with special computer program) from 1982. It’s so difficult to capture its lovely oddness is just a few sentences or images so I decided to scan the entirety of the book and make it available here (pdf). Inside you’ll find line-by-line instructions for creating charming portraits of everything from the British royal family to siamese cats and even Kojak.

I’ve long been interested in the way writers in the 1960s and 1970s were – once the typewriter had thoroughly become commonplace – finding ways to play with the limits and possibilities of this machine as a writing medium. I’ve also thought that we can look back on typestracts such as Steve McCaffery’s Carnival and see it as informed by a D.I.Y. and hacking sensibility. While this book of typewriter art is clearly invested in representationality and not particularly experimental, its content is entirely a D.I.Y. guide to creating typewriter art and is very much like computer magazines from the early 1980s such as Byte that would include BASIC programs. Here, instead of computer code, we’re given typewritten letters as code.  And in fact, the book includes an appendix with a Microsoft BASIC program for creating a “Prince Charles Portrait”, programmed for the Commodore PET. And since the second appendix is a chart showing “sizes of paper required for each picture on different kinds of typewriter,” I can’t help thinking this book is a unique artifact in that it’s entirely framed by the appearance of the personal computer – a book on a soon-to-be-outdated technology framed by its impending replacement by a new technology.

*

DOWNLOAD A PDF OF THE MAL CATALOG HERE.

Print Material
8-Bit Digital Sound Studio: User’s Guide. N.p.: Great Valley Products, Inc., 1992. Print.

Abernethy, Ken, T. Ray Nanney, and Hayden Porter. Exploring Macintosh: Concepts in Visually Oriented Computing. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1989. Print.

ALLC Bulletin 13.3 (1985). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 9.2 (1981). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 9.1 (1981). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 6.2 (1978). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 6.3 (1978). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 4.2 (1976). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 4.3 (1976). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 8.1 (1980). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 8.3 (1981). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 7.1 (1979). Print.

ALLC Bulletin 7.2 (1979). Print.

ALLC Journal 1.1 (1980). Print.

ALLC Journal 2.1 (1981). Print.

Apple II: DOS User’s Manual. Cupertino: Apple Computers, Inc., 1982. Print.

Apple II: Quick File II. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1982. Print.

Apple II Reference Manual. Cupertino: Apple Computer Inc, 1981. Print.

Apple II Utilities Guide. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1981. Print.

Applesoft BASIC Programmer’s Reference Manual. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1982. Print.

Berkowitz, Rob. Inside the Macintosh Communications Toolbox. Ed. Scott Smith and Becky Reece. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1991. Print.

De Jong, Marvin L. Apple II Assembly Language. Indianapolis: Howard W. Sams & Co, Inc, 1982. Print.

The Einstein MemoryTrainer User Guide. Los Angeles: The Einstein Corporation, 1983. Print.

Englebardt, Stanley L. The Worlds of Science: Cybernetics. New York: Pyramid, 1962. Print.

Finkel, LeRoy, and Jerald R. Brown. Apple Basic: Data File Programming. N.p.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1982. Print. Self Teaching Guide.

Frenzel, Louis E., Jr. Crash Course in Microcomputers. Indianapolis: Howard W. Sams & Co Inc, 1980. Print.

Gateley, Wilson Y., and Gary G. Bitter. Basic for Beginners. N.p.: McGraw Book Company, 1970. Print.

Grammer, Virginia Carter, and E. Paul. Goldenberg. The Terrapin Logo Language for the AppleII. Ed. Mark Eckenwiler and Peter Von Mertens. Cambridge: Terrapin, Inc., 1982. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. VI. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1991. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. V. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1986. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. IV. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1985. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. III. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1985. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. II. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1985. Print.

Inside Macintosh. Vol. I. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1985. Print.

Introduction, Complier, Editor. Cary: SAS Institute Inc., 1993. Print. Vol. 1 of SAS/C Development System User’s Guide.

Jenngs, Edward M. Science and Literature. Garden City: Anchor, 1970. Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 4.2 (1989). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 5.1 (1990). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 2.3 (1987). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 3.3 (1988). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 3.2 (1988). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 4.4 (1989). Print.

Literary & Linguistic Computing 4.1 (1989). Print.

Luebbert, William F. What’s Where in the Apple: A Complete Guide to the Apple Computer. Amherst: Micro Ink, 1982. Print.

Luedtke, Peter, and Rainer Luedtke. Your First Business Computer. Bedford: Digital Equipment Corporation, 1983. Print. The Desktop Computer Series.

Macintosh Manual. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1984. Print.

Micromodem Smartcom I: Owner’s Manual. Norcross: Hayes Microcomputer Products, 1983. Print.

Parikka, Jussi. What Is Media Archaeology? Cambridge: Polity, 2012. Print.

PC World 1.2 (1983). Print.

PC World 1.1 (1983). Print.

PC World 1.4 (1983). Print.

PC World 1.3 (1983). Print.

Perspectives in Computing 2.1 (1982). Print.

Perspectives in Computing 1.4 (1981). Print.

Perspectives in Computing 1.2 (1981). Print.

Perspectives in Computing 1.1 (1981). Print.

Ratliff, Wayne. dBASE II: Assembly Language Relational Database Management System. Culver City: Ratliff Software Production, Inc., 1982. Print.

Schneider, Ben Ross, Jr. Travels in Computerland. N.p.: Addison-Wesley, 1974. Print.

Smith, George W. Computers and Human Language. London: Oxford University, 1991. Print.

Smith, Jon M. Scientific Analysis on the Pocket Calculator. N.p.: John Wiley & Sons, 1975. Print.

Snell, Barbara M. Translating and the Computer. N.p.: North-Holland, 1979. Print.

Sobel, Robert. IBM: Colossus in Transition. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1981. Print.

Texas Instruments TI-99/4A Computer: Beginner’s BASIC. N.p.: Texas Instruments, 1979. Print.

Texas Instruments TI-99/4A Computer: User’s Reference Guide. Texas Instruments Incorporated ed. N.p.: Texas Instruments, 1979. Print.

Texas Instruments TI-99/4 Home Computer: TI Extended BASIC. Dallas: Texas Instruments, 1981. Print.

Tindall, Peggy Cagle, and Michel Boillot. Transparency Masters to Accompany Developing Computer Skills Using Appleworks. St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1991. Print.

Tucker, Allen B., Jr. Text Processing: Algorithms, Languages, and Applications. New York: Academic, 1979. Print.

Turkle, Sherry. The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984. Print.

Volume III. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1985. Print.

Wesson, Robert B. Perfect Calc User’s Guide. Berkeley: Perfect Software, Inc., 1982. Print.

Worley, Steven P. Essence: A Library of Algorithmic Textures for Imagine. N.p.: Apex Software, 1992. Print.

Zielinski, Siegfried. Deep Time of the Media. Cambridge: MIT, 2006. Print.

- – -, ed. Neapolitan Affairs: On Deep Time Relations of Arts, Sciences and Technologies. London: Quay Brothers, 2011. Print. Vol. 49 of Variantology 5.

- – -. On Deep Time Relations of Arts, Sciences, and Technologies. Oberhausen: Printmanagement Plitt, 206. Print. Vol. 35 of Variantology.

- – -, ed. On Deep Time Relations of Arts, Sciences and Technologies In the Arabic-Islamic World and Beyond. Oberhausen: Printmanagement Plitt, 2010. Print. Vol. 45 of Variantology 4.

- – -, ed. On Deep Time Relations of Arts, Sciences, Technologies In China and Elsewhere. Oberhausen: Printmanagement Plitt, 2008. Print. Vol. 37 of Variantology 3.

Software/Games
The Adams Family. Ocean Software Limited, 1992. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game

Agent USA. Jefferson City: Tom Snyder Productions, Inc. Inc., 1984. Cassette.

American Football. Argus Press Software Group, 1984. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game.

Applications Software. Dallas: Texas Instruments Inc., 1981. Cassette. System Unknown.

AwardWare. Plantation: Hi Tech Expressions, 1986. Floppy disc. System Unknown.

Beagle Bros Apple II Software. St. Clair Shores: Beagle Bros, 1992. Floppy disc. for Apple II Software

The Blues Brothers. Titus Software, 1991. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game

Castle Master. The Hit Squad, 1990. CD-ROM. Amiga Game

Certificate Maker. Springboard Stoftware, Inc., 1986. Floppy disc. For Apple II+, Apple IIe, Apple IIc.

Cluedo. Leisure Genius, 1984. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game.

Command Module. Dallas: Texas Instruments, 1979. Floppy disc.

Dollars and Sense. Inglewood: Monogram, 1983. Floppy disc. For Apple IIc

Electric Canyon This Land Is Your Land. Geneva: Polarware. Floppy Disk.. For Apple IIc

Electric Crayon ABCs. Geneva: Polarware, Inc. Floppy disc. For Apple IIc

EPYX Action. EPYX Inc., 1989. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game

Fleet System 2+. Needham: Professional Software, Inc., 1987. Floppy disc. For Commodore 64.

Interdictor Pilot. Supersoft, 1984. Cassette. System Unknown.

King’s Quest II: Romancing the Throne. Sierra, 1987. Floppy Disk. For Amiga.

King’s Quest III: To Heir is Human. Sierra, 1987. Floppy Disk. For Amiga.

Macintosh XL MacWorks XL. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc., 1984. Floppy disc. For Macintosh.

Maps and Globes: Latitude and Longitude. Mahwah: Troll Associates. Floppy disc. System Unknown.

Max Headroom. Quickstiva. Cassette. Commodore 64 Game (only 1 of 2 disks present)

Megaworks. San Diego: Megahaus. Floppy disc. For Apple IIc and Apple IIe.

Mitchell, Philip. Sherlock. Melbourne House Publishers, 1984. CD-ROM. Commodore 64 Game

My Label Maker. Menlo Park: MySoftwareCo. Floppy disc. System Unknown.

The News Room. Minneapolis: Springboard Software, Inc., 1986. CD-ROM. For Apple II+, Apple IIe, Apple Iic

Police Quest 1. Sierra. 1992. Floppy Disk. For Amiga.

Police Quest 2. Sierra. 1992. Floppy Disk. For Amiga.

Police Quest 3. Sierra. 1993. Floppy Disk. For Amiga.

Pinpoint. Oakland: Pinpoint, 1985. Floppy Disk. For Apple IIc, Apple IIe.

The Story so Far Compilation Pack: Volume 4. Elite, 1989. Cassette. Commodore 64 Games

Time Out Desk Tools II. San Diego: Beagle Bros, Inc., 1988. Floppy disc. For Apple II.

Back Room Inventory
Smith Corona grey typewriter

Smith Corona blue typewriter

Wollensak 3M tape recorder model 2820; labeled “CU ENGLISH DEPARTMENT” and CU 91218

Panasonic portable CD player model SL-SX320 w/ headphones attached

Sony Radio Cassette Player model WM-FX197

1 Nintendo Entertainment System; Model Number: NES-001; FCC ID: BMC9BENINTENDOETS; Serial Number: N11551290

2 Nintendo Controllers ; Model Number: NES-004

1 Nintendo Zapper; Model Number: NES-005

26 Nintendo Games:

1943: The Battle of Midway, 1985                 

 Battletoads. 1985

Blastermaster, 1985

Blades of Steel, 1985

 Contra, 1985

 Double Dragon, 1985

 Double Dragon II: The Revenge, 1985

Dracula’s Curse, 1985

Dragon Warrior, 1985

 Duck Tales, 1985

Excitebike, 1985

 From Russia with Fun, 1985

Jackal, 1985

 Megaman 2, 1985

 Mega Man 3, 1985

Metroid, 1985

 Punch-out, 1985

 Skate or Die, 1985

 Super Dodge Ball, 1985

 Super Mario Bros: Duck Hunt. 1985

 Super Mario Bros. 2, 1985

Super Mario Bros. 3, 1985

The Simpsons: Bart vs. the Space Mutants, 1985

 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, 1985

 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Arcade Game, 1985

 Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, 1985

Front Room Inventory
1 Apple IIe Computer

1 AppleColor Composite Monitor; Model Number: A2M6020; Serial Number: S; FCC ID: BCG90QNA2M6020

1 Keyboard; Model Number: A2S2128; Serial Number: E02210ZAS2128; FCDD ID: BCG6DSA2S2128

1 Apple 5.25 Drive; Model Number: A9M0107; Serial Number: KGU9861

1 Mouse; Model Number: M0100; Serial Number: 0435A11E00185

1 KoalaPad+; FCC ID: CN475EPAD001

1 Macintosh Lisa

1 Monitor; Model Number: A6S0200; Serial Number: A4284080

1 Keyboard; Model Number: A6MB101; Serial Number: 1061595

1 Mouse; Model Number: M0100; Serial Number: G512M010001909

1 Box of Imation 2DD, 720KB

1 Apple IIc

1 Monitor; Model Number: G090H; Serial Number: T077678; FCC: BCG966MNTR2CG090H

1 Keyboard; Model Number: A2S4000; FCC ID: BCG9GRA2S4000; Serial Number: F609608A2S4000

1 Mouse; Serial Number: M528M010005151; Model Number: M0100

1 Disk IIc; Model Number: A2M4050; Serial Number: F301954; FCC ID: BC69Z6A2M4050

1 Macintosh Centris 610

1 Monitor (Macintosh 12” RGB Display); Family Number: M1296

1 Apple Desktop Bus Mouse; Family Number: G5431

1 Keyboard; Model Number: M2980; FCC ID: BCGM2980

1 Apple iMac G3

1 Apple USB Keyboard; Model Number: M2452; Serial Number: NK8470XUADL2

1 Apple USB Mouse; Model Number: M4848

1 iMac G4

1 Pro Keyboard; Model Number: M7803; Serial Number: M7803

1 Pair of speakers

1 Macintosh Portable; Model Number: M5120; FCC ID: BCGM5120

1 Macintosh PowerBook 165; Model Number: M4440; FCC ID: BCGM4440

1 Apple MacBook Air; Serial Number: W882609UY5G

1 Apple iBook G4; Model Number: A1054

1 Apple iBook G3; Family Number: M2453; Serial Number: UV949322H6Q

1 IBM Portable Personal Compuer (no ID numbers)

1 COMPAQ Portable III; Model Number: 2660; FCC ID: CNT75M2660; Serial Number: CNT75M2660

1 COMPAQ Portable; Model Number: 2670; FCC ID: CNT75M5401; Serial Number: 1848HN3H0355

1 NeXTcube

1 NeXT Computer; Part Number: 23.00; Model Number: N1000; Serial Number: AAK0004152;

1 NeXT Keyboard; Part Number: 193; Serial Number: AAF 1532557

1 NeXT MegaPixel Display Monitor; Model Number: N400OA; Part Number: 1403; Serial Number: AAA 7026704

1 NeXT Mouse; Model Number: N400A; Part Number: 193; Serial Number: AAF 1532557

1 IBM 5151

1 IBM Keyboard (No ID Numbers)

1 IBM Personal Computer Display; Model Number: 5151; Serial Number: 0889756; FCC ID: AN08ZA5151

1 IBM Personal Computer; Model Number: 5151; Serial Number: 0889756; FCC ID: AN08ZA5151

1 Commodore Amiga 500

1 Commodore Keyboard; Model Number: A500; Serial Number: CA1112119; FCC ID: BR98YV-B52

1 Amiga Monitor; FCC ID: AG19XA-1080

1 SMITH ENG. Vectrex

1 Vectrex; Model Number: 3000; Serial Number: 142309A

1 Vectrex Arcade System (No ID Numbers)

1 VectrexLIGHTPEN (No ID Numbers)

1 Commodore 64

1 Commodore C2N Cassette; Serial Number: 2951548; FCC ID: BR99VMC2N-A

1 Gemstick (No ID Numbers)

1 Commodore 64 Keyboard; Model Number 64; Serial Number: P00961638;FCC ID: P00961638

1 Commodore Monitor; Model Number: 1084S-P; Serial Number: 181231

1 Commodore Single Drive Floppy Disk; Model Number: 1541; Serial Number: BA1A73536; FCC ID:  BR98DD-1541

1 KAYPRO II

1 KAYPRO II Keyboard

Storage Room
7 Commodore Keyboards; Model Number 64; FCC ID: BR98YV-64

1-    Serial Number: P00571266

2-    Serial Number: P01201694

3-    Serial Number: P00194582

4-    Serial Number: P00523783

5-    Serial Number: P5069951

6-    Serial Number: P00667703

7-    Serial Number: P5206846 (damaged)

6 Commodore Single Drive Floppy Model 1541; FCC ID: BR978H1541

1-    Serial Number: BA1C15223

2-    Serial Number: BA1C37290

3-    Serial Number: AJ1A64384

4-    Serial Number: BB1015068

5-    Serial Number: AB1308436

6-    Serial Number: JA1066169

3 Commodore C2N Cassettes; FCC ID: BR99VMC2N-A

1-    Serial Number: 2644906

2-    Serial Number: 2244157

3-    Serial Number: 2201862

2 Commodore Datassettes; FCC ID: BR99VMC2N-A

4-    Serial Number: 372569

5-    Serial Number:1419210

1 Maxim Computer Cassette Unit; Model Number: PM-C16

5 Apple II Disk; FCC ID: BCG9GRDISKII; Model Number: A2M0003

1-    Serial Number: 2147209

2-    Serial Number: 1131734

3-    Serial Number: 813903

4-    Serial Number: 429981

5-    Serial Number: 484451

Donations from Timothy P. Sweeney
1 Startfight Joystick

2 paddle joysticks

2 ATARI electrical cords

1 Atari joystick and STICKSTAND

1 ATARI 400, 16K

Model?# G 16K 441 2137

Serial? # 175 AVO43273-16 10/23 L4 (text ripped off sticker)

1 ATARI 410 Program Recorder

Model# T33589

Serial # 44862

1 ATARI 1050 Disk Drive DOS 3 (with powercord)

Serial # 7VDFF 23960 494

1 ATARI 800 XL

Serial #166528

1 SWITCH BOX CAO10112

Games
Ms. PAC-MAN, Atari Cartridge

MUSIC COMPOSER, ATARI CXL4007, Cartridge

EASTERN FRONT (1941): Computer Strategy Game, ATARI RX8039, Cartridge

BASIC COMPUTING LANGUAGE, ATARI CXL4002, Cartridge

PAC-MAN Computer Game, ATARI CXL4022, Cartridge

SUPER BREAKOUT Computer Games, ATARI CXL4006, Cartridge

Cribbage & Dominoes, for ATARI 400/800

Cassette

Instruction Manual

Sky Writer, ATARI Cartridge

DELTA DRAWING Learning Program, for ATARI 400/800/ALL X LS

Cartridge

Advertising insert for Spinnaker Software

Owners Manual

KICKBACK, for ATARI 400/800

Cartridge

Instruction manual

Flight Landing Simulator, Main Street Publishing, for Atari

5.25″ floppy

Instruction sheet

Microsailing, Main Street Publishing, for Atari

5.25″ floppy

CardWare: Animated Birthday Greeting Disk And All Occasion Card Maker, Commodore ATARI Flip Disk. C64/128 and ATARI 400/800

1 5.25″ floppy

Productivity Software/Blank Floppies/Cassettes
AtariLab starter set with temperature module. a science series for Atari computers. developed by Dickinson College. Atari Inc., 1983.

Owners manual

AtariLab Interface

AtariLab Thermometer

AtariLab temperature module cartridge

SynTrend: Graphing, Statistical Analysis & Forecasting, Atari

published by Synapse, copyright 1983

Owers manual

2 5.25″ floppies

SynFile+: The Ultimate Filing System, Atari

published by Synapse, copyright 1983

Owers manual

1 5.25″ floppies

SynCalc: Advanced Electronic Spreadsheet

published by Synapse, copyright 1983

Owers manual

2 5.25″ floppies

1 Blank Cassette, “Channel Master”

1 5.25″ Floppy, labelled “ATARI DOS 2.05 Single Density Working Disk”, DataTech 1D, Single Side/Double Density

1 5.25″ Floppy, labelled “DOS 3.0″, DataTech 1D, Single Side/Double Density

1 5.25″ Floppy, labelled “Homemade PGMS”, DataTech 1D, Single Side/Double Density

SUITCASE Font and Desk Acessory Liberation (for Apple Macintosh)

1 3.25″ floppy

Copyright 1987 Software Supply

Manuals
ATARI Disk Operating System Reference Manual, DOS 3, Atari Inc., 1983.

ATARI Service Contract: Low Cost Protection For Your Atari Home Computer, Atari Inc., 1983.

An Introduction to the ATARI Disk Operating System, DOS 3. Atari Inc., 1983.

ATARI 1050 Disk Drive Owner’s Guide, Atari Inc., 1983.

ATARI 1050 Disk Drive: An Introduction to the ATARI Disk Operating System, Atari Inc., 1983.

[pamphlet] THE ATARI 400 COMPUTER SYSTEM. COMPUTERS FOR THE PEOPLE. ATARI INC., 1981.

THE ATARI 400 COMPUTER SYSTEM: THE BASIC COMPUTER OWNER’S GUIDE. ATARI INC., 1981.

ATARI BASIC Reference Guide. Atari Inc., 1983.

[photocopied manual in white binder] ATARI BASIC. by Bob Albrecht, Le Roy Finkel, and Jerald R. Brown. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1979.

THE BIG BROTHER THESAURUS. Deneba Software, 1988. no floppy.

FileMaker 4: Setting the Data Management Standard. Nashoba Systems. For Apple Macintosh. 1983.

HyperCard Quick Reference Guide. Apple Computer.

HyperCard: Installation and new features. 1998, Apple Computer.

Write Now 4: POWER Word Processing For the Macintosh. 1993, WordStar International.

HyperCard 2.0 Script Language Guide. 1989, Apple Computer.

Ashton-Tate Learning Full Impact. Owners Manual. 1990, Ashton-Tate Corporation.

MAC PAC ’88 $110 in rebate coupons on these leading products. Envelope with coupons enclosed.

The ATARI 800XL Home Computer Owners Guide. 1983, Atari Inc.

Scram Computer Program: A Nuclear Power Plant Simulation. Atari 400/800. (no cartridge)

Magazines
10 Start Programs, from Family Computing. By Joey Lattimer. For Apple, Atari, Commodore 64 and VIC-20, TI, TIMEX, and TRS-80. 1983.

Family Computing: The Lure of Fantasy and Adventure Games. 1:2 (October 1983).

Family Computing: Preschool Computing: What’s Too Young? 1:3 (November 1983).

Family Computing: A Guide to Word Processing by Peter McWilliams. 1:4 (December 1983).

Family Computing: Computing Fun in the Sun. 2:1 (January 1984).

Family Computing: Computing and Careers. 2:4 (April 1984).

Family Computing: More Power for the Home. 3:11 (November 1985).

The Best of Family Computing Programs by Joey Latimer. 1985.  Scholastic Inc.

Family Computing: Improve Your Job: Put Your Computer To Work at Home. 4:2 (February 1986).

Family Computing: Earn Money With Your Computer. 4:5 (May 1986).

Family Computing: Buyer’s Guide to Computers. 4:6 (June 1986).

Family Computing: Writing With Computers Part 1: How to Find the Right Word Processor for Your Needs. 4:8 (August 1986).

GPX Atari Program Exchange. Software Catalog Spring Edition 1982. User-Written Software for ATARI Home Computer Systems.

GPX Atari Program Exchange. Software Catalog Summer Edition 1982. User-Written Software for ATARI Home Computer Systems.

GPX Atari Program Exchange. Software Catalog Fall Edition 1982. User-Written Software for ATARI Home Computer Systems.

GPX Atari Program Exchange. Software Catalog Winter Edition 1982-1983. User-Written Software for ATARI Home Computer Systems.

Antic: The ATARI Resource. Communications special issue. 1:2 (June 1982).

Antic: The ATARI Resource. Printers special issue. 1:3 (August 1982).

ATARI SPECIAL ADDITIONS. Volume 1 Winter 1982. Catalog of Additional Products for your Atari Home Computer.

The ATARI Connection. 2:1 (Spring 1982). A New World of Information.

The ATARI Connection. 2:4 (Winter 1982). How to Introduce Your Child to a Home Computer.

The ATARI Connection Spring 1983. Debut: Atari 1200XL Home Computer

 Donations from Robert Craig
1 Zenith Monitor for use with the Osborne computer

Model # ZVM-121

Chasis: 12MB15X

Service # ZVM-121   I5T?? (text unclear because ink is bleeding/fading)

Serial # 4045726

1 Osborne I with attached keyboard and power cable.

Date of purchase: 12/3/1082

Serial No. NA003113

Media
Osborne I User’s Reference Guide (Print)

Pub. 2/22/1982

Osborne User’s Guide – Applications and Programming (Print)

Copyright 1983

Media Master Plus Application – 5.5in Floppy

This two program package includes

Disk-to-disk format conversion software

ZP/EM 8-bit Emulation for MS-DOS

Booklet for Microlink computer program for the Osborne

Guidebook for “dBase II Assembly Language – Database Management System Version 23b”

Manual Revision 1.C 12

12/10/83

For use on the Osborne I

3 Binders

JRT Pascal User’s Guide

185 pages detailing common problems and their solutions for the JRT implementation of the Pascal programming language.

FOG Volumes III and IV

The First Osborne Group’s Monthly CP/M publications, from Vol III No. 8 (May 1984) to Vol IV No. 12 (September 1985)

FOG Volumes V and VI (and parts of VII)

The First Osborne Group’s Monthly CP/M publications, from Vol V No. 1 (October 1985) to Vol VII No.6 (March 1988)

Various Pamphlets/Guidebooks on

82 Space Raiders

Instructions for “Eliza” – Osborne I Version

Ozzy-Man User Instructions

Retail Advertisement/Order form for Portable Software, Inc’s Games, Applications, and             Hardware Accessories

Key-Wiz ver 1.01

Gramatik Manual

The Double Density Upgrade for the Osborne one Computer “S/N AA50016um”

The 80 Column Upgrade “S/N BB06912”

Installation Procedure for Osborne Fan Assembly

EXMON external monitor adapter Instructions

Various Hardware for the Osborne I

Replacement back panel/handle attachement

Two screwdrivers – 1 Phillips, 1 specialty hexagonal shape

Two unknown Transistor-like replacement pieces, both 16 prong.  Condition and use unknown

One converter, RCA to 20 prong system – possibly for use to convert video outputs

One 24 pronged replacement device

One Two pronged connector replacement piece

1 box of assorted 5.5 in Floppy disks (Some homemade, some purchased)

SS/SD Disk R/O Version 11

FOG – Starter.001

FOG – Starter.002

CPM.010 #1 of 2

CPM.010 #2 of 2

DU Disk Utility, Modem Program, Wash Utility

Grammatik

Addict Pack Disks 1-4

Portable Software Family Pack

Eliza Version 3.0 Microsoft BASIC-80 Version

Robot Gladiators

DBASE II Tutor Disks 1-6

DBASE II disk

DBASE II Zip

DBASE II Sample Data files

JRT Pascal Ver 3.0 Disks 1-3

Key-Wiz Sort-Wiz

Osborne CP/M System

Osborne CP/M Utility

Osborne Wordstar/Mailmerge

Osborne Micro Link

Osborn CBASIC/MBASIC

Supercalc

*

discourse.cpp (Peer Press, 2011) is a short collection of computer-generated poetry edited by computational linguistics scholar Aurélie Herbelot, produced by a computer called O.S. le Si mainly used for natural language processing, and named after a program which tries to identify the meanings of words based on their context. In this case, Herbelot inputted 200,000 pages from Wikipedia for the program to then parse and output lists of items whose context is similar to words such as “gender,” “love,” “family,” and “illness;” for example, Herbelot explains that content in the opening piece titled “the creation” was “selected out of a list of 10,000 entries. Each entry was produced by automatically looking for taxonomic relationships in Wikipedia”; and, for the piece titled “gender,” she chose the “twenty-five best contexts for man and woman in original order. No further changes.” (47) The collection is, then, as we are told on the back-cover, “about things that people say about things. It was written by a computer.”

Poets – or, for the sake of those still attached to the notion of an author who intentionally delivers well-crafted, expressive writing, “so-called poets” – have been experimenting with producing writing with the aid of digital computer algorithms since Max Bense and Theo Lutz first experimented with computer-generated writing in 1959. The most well-known English-language example is the 1984 collection of poems The Policeman’s Beard is Half-Constructed by the Artificial Intelligence program Racter (a collection which was, it was later discovered, heavily edited by Racter creators William Chamberlain and Thomas Etter). discourse.cpp is yet another experiment in testing the capabilities of the computer and computer-programmer to create not so much “good” poetry as revealing poetry – poetry that is not meant to be close-read (most often to discover underlying authorial intent) but rather read as a collection of a kind of linguistic evidence. In this case, the collection provides evidence of the computer program’s probings of trends in online human language usage which in turn, not surprisingly, provides evidence of certain prevailing cultural norms; for example, we can see quite clearly our culture’s continued attachment to heteronormative gender roles in “Gender”:

Woman                        Man
man love —                    — win title
— marry man                — love woman
— give birth                   — claim be (18)

More, this linguistic evidence also draws attention to the ever-increasing intertwinement of human and digital computer and the resulting displacement of the human as sole reader-writer now that the computer is also a reader-writer alongside (and often in collaboration with) the human.

As Herbelot rightly points out in the “Editor’s Foreword,” to a large extent this experimentation with the computer as reader-writer also comes out of early twentieth century, avant-garde writing that similarly sought to undermine, if not displace, the individual intending author. Dadaist Tristan Tzara, for instance, infamously wrote “TO MAKE A DADAIST POEM” in 1920 in which he advocates writing poetry by cutting out words from a newspaper article, randomly choosing these words from a hat, and then appropriating these randomly chosen words to create a poem by “an infinitely original author of charming sensibility.” Tzara was, of course, being typically Dadaist in his tongue-in-cheek attitude; but he was also, I believe, serious in his belief that the combination of appropriation and chance-generated methods of producing text could produce original writing that simultaneously undermined the egotism of the author. However, insofar as discourse.cpp comes out of a lineage of experimental writing invested in chance-generated writing and, later, in exploiting computer technology as the latest means by which to produce such writing, it also comes out of a certain tradition of disingenuousness that comes along with this lineage. No matter how much Tzara and later authors of computer-generated writing sought to remove the human-as-author, there was and still is no getting around the fact that humans are in fact deeply involved in the creation process – whether as cutters-and-pasters, computer programmers, inputters, or editors. The collection, then, is a much more complex amalgam than even Herbelot seems willing to acknowledge as discourse.cpp is evidence of the evenly distributed reading and writing that took place between Herbelot and the computer/program itself.