Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Technology Books Media Book Reviews

Disconnected 136

Are you an "isolate?" In Disconnected, University of Wisconsin computing professor William Wresch takes a look at the cultural divide between the information haves and have-nots of the world, from workers in Namibia to tribesmen in the Kalihari to isolates in America who, despite lots of technology, choose to stand apart from their peers and organizations. He makes an interesting case for the idea that access to information may ultimately have more to do with divisions in the world than nationalism, ethnicity or geography.

Disconnected: Haves and Have Nots in the Information Age
author William Wresch
pages 268
publisher Rutgers University Press
rating 7/10
reviewer Jon Katz
ISBN 0-8135-2370-2
summary disparities in information distribution and transmission

*

Are you a cultural isolate? According to Disconnected: Haves and Have Nots in the Information Age, by William Wresch, "isolates" comprise between 27% and 50% of the members of most corporate and private organizations.

"Many individuals," he writes, "have tenuous connections to the organizations they work for. They want no more to do with that organization than their job, or their paycheck, requires. They don't show up at the company picnic, read the company newsletter, or tune in to the company grapevine."

Wresch suggests that this is so because despite the explosion in new information technologies, most companies don't know how to get their employees to communicate with one another. He says it's impossible to imagine any Japanese organization reporting 7% alienated employees, much less 50%. U.S. organizations not only have huge numbers of isolated employees but still manage to survive and prosper.

Wresch cites Lucasfilms which discovered through internal research that there was almost no horizontal communication between editors, cinematographers, and artists, to which it responded by carefully restructuring its softball teams so that no team could have more than one person from the same department.

Curiously, Wresch portrays "isolates" as problem employees in need of curing. (I consider myself an isolate. I am quite happy to belong to an organization, but have no interest in showing up at the company picnic, reading the company newsletter, or wiring into the company grapevine. Nor do I want to join the company softball team (the idea of a Slashdot softball team is pretty amusing) to make me more social or communal. Working alone, or from something of a distance seems to me as valid a choice as being the kind of rah-rah team players the Disney Corporation breeds and encourages.)

But Disconnected is still a thoughtful, provocative study of a world in which there are vast and growing disparities between what people know and how they know it. His portrayals of information realities in other parts of the world are startling, an information context most Americans are losing touch with. He writes of "information exiles" whose culture or geography keep them disconnected from the information age. He also reminds us that our own techno-rich culture is still, in many ways, an anomaly in the world. He contrasts the way information moves around in the info-rich West with the way information moves (or doesn't) in Namibia, where he spent some time working and researching.

What will happen to the disconnected of the information age, he wonders? "As subsistence farming and handicrafts persisted through the industrial age, will the disconnected carry on, barely feeding themselves, producing the primitive and quaint for middle-class coffee tables? Early indications are that the disconnected will fare far worse than their predecessors in previous revolutions. The gap between the rich and the poor, the knowing and the ignorant, will be larger, the room along the margins far smaller."

Disconnected is a reminder that our own information experiences -- especially those in America, Asia and Western Europe -- aren't yet remotely typical of the world, where laborers often stand on street corners for hours, even days,waiting to hear some news about possible jobs. And even in our own hi-tech cultures, there are curious disparities between information haves and have-nots. Wresch, a computing professor at the University of Wisconsin, also raises a number of useful ideas about closing the information divide, from community computing centers to the conversion of civic and public affairs offices to electronic centers of information dissemination.

"Cultures of isolation aren't the only problems of personal information channels," he writes. "Since these channels are largely invisible, they can be filled with myths, lies, and hatreds. Few outsiders even know what is being said, nor do they have opportunities to correct even the most egregious errors. Yet error-prone or not, these are channels that supply much of the world's information."

You might not always agree with Wresch's conclusions, and he raises many more questions than solutions, but "Disconnected" is an interesting book (the writing isn't great but workable) which looks at information technology from an original perspective, especially for a computing academic. The book tells some uncomfortable truths about information and technology, and as happy as we are to play with our information-scarfing new toys and tools, it's an important reality check. Wresch essentially is writing about the forgotten people in the Information Revolution, the info-refugees and exiles, the people who fall between the cracks, unable or unwilling to use technology to collect information in an accessible or beneficial way.

Purchase this book at ThinkGeek.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review: "Disconnected"

Comments Filter:
  • Seriously, IBM went to India and upgraded the technology there from 13th century to 19th century. They currently have connections in Africa, where they flaunt their servers by leaving them out in the barren savannah. IBM is becoming the Red Cross of the Internet.
  • Or people who can't use a browser?

    I'm confused here, first Katz talks about people who don't want to play software, then he talks about information have nots.

    You can have a rich social life without playing softball on the company team. For instance, I correspond about my interests with people all over the world, and every few years I actually meet one of my correspondents in the flesh.

    And just last weekend I talked to a woman while buying donuts, I'm hardly a social malcontent just because I don't play softball.

    And I know how to use a browser, because that's how I meet my friends, in the chat rooms.

    Thsi review made my head hurt.
  • by bluGill ( 862 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @04:33AM (#764409)

    Sorry boss, but I have a life, and it isn't my job. I know the folks who keep up with the grape vine in my department, and I talk to them just enough to figgure out what is going on here. Those who work with me closely know where I'm the expert, and I know the experts I normally work with. I know that this product must do something useful, but it doesn't matter, my job is to make sure the fans are running, and if not warn the customers. I don't need to know anything about what the customer would buy this box for. I know mky co-workers are smart people and will see their part works, and the grapevine people are watching over the whole thing to make sure I can spend my time working with fans (and many related things), not worring about how I will affect them.

    There are only so many man-months in my life, and If I had to personally know everyone on this project The number avaiable for me to concentrate on fans is greatly reduced.

    I like to fish. I like enjoy creating a program. I don't enjoy talking to many people or meeting new people. I know folks who do enjoy that type of work, and so I let them be my connection to the rest of the company. It works good for all of us.

    Fortunatly my boss knows that I work to feed and shelter me. We would both be retired if we didn't have to eat and have warm cloths on our backs. We both have friends who do not work in the same building as us. We both know that we spend about half our waking hours at work already.

    PS, for those who don't get the subtilties of english, pppbbbbt is the closest I can come in words to sticking my tongue out at those who think I should live according to what they think is important.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21, 2000 @04:33AM (#764410)
    Coming just in time for XMas..."Save JonKatz" (for Win95/98 and Nintendo)

    In this exciting computer game adventure, JonKatz is trapped in the socialist-devout readings section of the University of Wisconsin library, forced to write book reviews from nearsited, geek-angst drivel.

    Do you help JonKatz excape to the Christian reading room for the salvation of his soul, or seek the Objectivist section for the restoration of his mind? Or let him rot as he reads of hatred for Western civilization and professes the superiority of the uneducated rice-paddy masses.

    Only your guidance and your quick reactions gives Katz any hope!

    Sure to be an arcade classic. In stores soon.
  • Couple of issues... 1) Isolationism is not necessarily a "disease" in need of "curing" (read corporate brainwashing). I can pick my friends but I can't pick my co-workers, many of which are complete assholes who you wouldn't even slow down for in a crosswalk. Do I really need to be "cured" of not wanting to associate with assholes? 2) There is a huge difference between information and knowledge. I'm not sure I agree that the isolated Namibian tribesman posesses less knowledge than the corporate secretary/bimbo with high-speed internet access. Information yes, but knowledge no.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Cisco "Are you ready" commercials to the contrary, the big IT revolution isn't really that large a deal, folks. True, it's provided some interesting effects on American and European capital markets and employment numbers, but it's still "57 channels and nothing on". As to "isolates", I wonder what constitutes the guy's system of measurement? Has he ever been to a company picnic? Why must a place of work become some sort of Walton's episode, anyway? We just work with these people. One can understand the fraternity system as a drinking-buddy support system during college, but in general, corporate attempts at fostering social atmosphere seem forced and unnatural.
  • Perhaps the high workloads, and the stress as a result from that, could qualify as a reason for that. The 24 hour economy forces people to work harder and harder, and limits employees to socialize during working hours; you only have time to work (as hard as you can). So when the day is done, what would you rather do: go have a party with co-workers, or go home to your family (or on your own) or go to friends? I know that I would rather spend some time on my own, than spending some more hours in a work-related environment. Because what do people mostly talk about on after-hour company events: yes, work! And for not really being interested in the company (not reading the company magazine): by being forced to work harder, and thereby increasing stresslevels, the employee is more and more alienated from the company; so he/she will be more reluctant to now more about the company.
    How to make a sig
    without having an idea
  • shoulda previewed and closed my tag. D'oh!
  • Now that was funny, you should get moderated up !
  • I agree with both the writer and the reviewer.

    If I do not want to be part of the corporate culture(i.e. going to the picnic) I should not be thought of as alienated. I DO have a life and I want to have friends I do not see every day. But I am in the IT field.

    Many peoples jobs are not able to be performed in an isolated environment for those workers alienation can seriously impact their work and spill over in to thier private life(go postal).

    In the end it boils down to a matter of choice. I like to be isolated to work but sometimes I do the Company thing.

  • No one in their right mind should consider a 7014, a 942 or a V2 `400 20th century technology.

    The previous poster had it right.
  • "If you're not into sports (e.g. softball), there's something wrong with you! Go Big Red!"

    The University of Wisconsin (and Madison, and Wisconsin, and the Midwest in general) is pathologically sports-obsessed. That kind of thinking is one of the reasons I left town. Now I'm a couple blocks off the campus of MIT. The only time MIT goes to the Rose Bowl is when CalTech hacks the scoreboard, in which case MIT gets creamed. ;-)

  • by Anonymous Coward
    I haven't been to a company picnic in my life. I don't play softball. I don't roam the halls of the office desperately looking for someone to gossip with.

    So frickin' what????

    The author portrays "isolates" as a problem in his book most likely because he's a management weenie whose life is defined by their job. Mine isn't -- for me my job is strictly a business transaction. I work, they pay me. Period. If you want me at the picnic, pay me to show up. I don't work to make friends, I already have friends.

    I wonder if in his book the author ever attempts to justify the assumption that being an "isolate" is a bad thing. I highly doubt it.

  • Not all "isolates" are isolated by choice. I happen to live in a very small town because of my SO's occupation. I telecommute as a software developer and have a near-constant flow of emails and periodic phone communication with the main office, but I don't take part in staff meetings, much less social events.

    Locally, I have no peer group because chicken farmers (at least the ones I know) don't write code. There are people to socialize with, but I have zero face time with /. types.

    I guess I qualify for this broad generalization, but the stereotype doesn't necessarily address the cause.

  • I think what Katz was objecting to was the attitude that anyone who doesn't want to play on the company softball team is instantly regarded as being "the weird guy" like I'm going to come into work with an assault rifle or something. I spend enough hours with these people that I really don't want to hang out after work with them and if that makes me a freak then so be it. I don't need to spend my after work hours dodging leather-covered missiles to feel like a member of the company.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • He's talking about people who are deaf, dumb, and blind. BTW It looks like I've finally found someone with a more annoying login than mine.
    ---
  • There is no such person, William Wresch, at UW-Madison, nor at UW-Milwaukee. Since Jon Katz doesn't give us the full information, it is possible that he is mistaken...

    Also, the book was written in 96 - I wonder why Katz doesn't discuss if it is still relevant today...

  • ...is it available for linux?
    ---
  • by Linux_ho ( 205887 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @05:05AM (#764427) Homepage
    "Many individuals," he writes, "have tenuous connections to the organizations they work for. They want no more to do with that organization than their job, or their paycheck, requires. They don't show up at the company picnic, read the company newsletter, or tune in to the company grapevine." Wresch suggests that this is so because despite the explosion in new information technologies, most companies don't know how to get their employees to communicate with one another.
    ...SNIP
    Early indications are that the disconnected will fare far worse than their predecessors in previous revolutions. The gap between the rich and the poor, the knowing and the ignorant, will be larger, the room along the margins far smaller."


    Without having read the book, from Katz' review it sounds like the Wresch confuses "cultural isolates" with ignorance. Sure, channels of information will be different between social groups, but that doesn't mean one group of information is any less valuable than another.

    I'm not sure whether this is just Katz' spin or the author's opinion, but I'm really getting tired of reading about the poor technilliterates. Almost every non-technical person feels like they don't know enough about computers. However, almost all of them know enough to do what they need to do with computers. We still need people to build roads, design buildings, make coffee tables, airplanes, etc. Not everyone needs to be a programmer. Sure, some of these skills require some basic computer skills, but people learn what they need to learn to do these things. Most people studying aerodynamics are not going to have any trouble learning CAD. Someone with the talent to write the next great work of literature will figure out Abiword (or whatever) without too much trouble.

    The problem is not with "technical literacy". The problem is with education in general. Teaching people to read is far more important than teaching them to use computers, and is a far more difficult thing to learn. People who can read well can teach themselves all they need to know about computers, which may very well be nothing.

  • One of the irritating things that I see is that the whole culture of software design seems to be putting emphasis on the fact that data can be communicated in the least without the *quality* of the data that is being transacted.

    I had an internet connection at my home for a little while with freewwweb and thought it was rather nice. No more having to dick around with floppies just to get a program broken up into disk sized chunks. No more being forced to wait for a computer to borrow. In fact it was incredibly nice.

    Then the bastards decided to sell out and screw their clients. I faithfully went to their portal every day and they still went down the sewer in the end.

    What irritates me is that a company is funding the development of network infrastructure and connectivity when people who live in the USA are still without net access. It's kind of like dealing with African refuges when we have homeless, poor, and disadvantaged right here at home.

    And I doubt that IBM was solely responsible for upgrading the technology of India. I think that the period that India was a British colony had something more to do with it becomming a better and more influential world power and going from 13th to 19th century technology.

    Oh and computers as we know them were invented in roughly the last quarter of the *20th* century not the 19th, Babages difference engine dosn't count.
  • The US is one of the few countries where everyone wants to drive great distances to experience events, pay lots of money to get in, and then leave before it is even over just so they can beat the traffic. If given a chance to be disconnected from society, co-workers, whoever, most of us will choose to do so.
  • You can have a rich social life without playing softball on the company team.

    Corporate culture doesn't WANT you to have a rich social life. Corporate culture wants you to "hive-in" to the company "family." If the only people you regularly associate with are also your coworkers, it helps to blur the lines between job/home until you suddenly don't mind working 10+ hours of overtime a week, because you're still just hanging out with your buddies.

    I play music. I have for more than half my life. (I'm 25) When 5pm hits, I'm out the door. I go practice or I go record something, or I go to a club. I'm not interested in going to a bar with the guys from work, or bowling or anything. I'm not interested in standing around in the lobby gossipping about who got breast implants and who got fired and who got caught with so-and-so's wife.

    If all of that makes me a "Isolate" so be it. I always have been. Work is job. Work is not life. Work is a means to provide me with the cashflow I need to do what *I* want to do with life. If I could figure out a way to cut out the work and still have the cash, I'd walk away and never look back.

    I'd rather spend my days reading, playing my songs, exercising, meditating.

    (anybody wanna sponsor me?)
    -The Reverend
  • OK, but it still sounds just like the University of Wisconsin. ;-)

    -Mark Gordon

  • Having read "Disconnected" for a class in college, I'd say it basically makes obvious the rift that exists between the rich, technically inclined, and "fortunate" people who live in the "information age". The author uses wonderfully horrible cyber-cliches and tries to say that in the third world, peoples lives aren't so fancy.

    Most of it didn't really hit home with me. It's obvious that a large portion of the world remains unconnected and lives a simpler life, and that many of them may not be aware that a network like the internet even exists.

    The book basically takes the division of classes to the next level, going beyond the advantage those with technical knowledge have above the less-educated, and taking it to a global area with comparisons to villages in Africa. There are more cars in the state of New Jersey than all of Africa.

    Don't differences like this make it obvious enough? For the geek reader, this book gets a 4/10
  • You were the fist poerson to graciously point out my error and point me to the correct definition of comprise.

    for this some mod modded you as redundant?

    You lost kharma because some mod doesn't understand numbers?

    Boo. hiss.
  • Corporate culture doesn't WANT you to have a rich social life. Corporate culture wants you to "hive-in" to the company "family." If the only people you regularly associate with are also your coworkers, it helps to blur
    the lines between job/home until you suddenly don't mind working 10+ hours of overtime a week, because you're still just hanging out with your buddies.


    Maybe it's a culture thing but none of my family ever worked in an office. The one difference is that when work ended my dad always returned home. He was never the type to hand around the job gossiping or being something that the company wanted him to be.

    My grandfather was more like a person who enjoyed social aspects of his job. He spent long hours doing his job but it was more of love for his job and the ability to get work he enjoyed done. In this aspect he was more aloof.

    Of course you want dedicated workers but I doubt in the real world anybody expects to be forcing you to do more and more work. Besides at least in the United States you get paid 150% of your normal salary if you in fact do work any over time. In this respect they *don't* want you to work any more time than normal.

  • by Paul Neubauer ( 86753 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @05:25AM (#764435)

    ...restructuring its softball teams so that no team could have more than one person from the same department.

    I can only wonder what they and places similar would do about those of us who would rather avoid softball (and other "but everybody likes x" activities).

    Probably something about 'not a team a player' or other such dreck. Am I an 'isolate'? Perhaps. But let's get cause and effect straight first shall we? Maybe the 'popular' things are the same things I'd sooner visit a dentist than get involved in. (I have finally gotten my coworkers trained enough to not bother me with their "fun" things I find nauseating or painful.. took long enough too).

    About apparent isolation the first question should be "Is it real?" and follow that with "And if so, is it a problem?" and only after finding 'yes' as an answer to both questions should a treatment be sought -- and of that it must be asked "Will this help, or it will cause resentment?" Just becuase some simpleton believes "everybody likes X" doesn't make it the case. (Quick: Does every geek like Star Wars? Does every male watch the Superbowl?)

    I'm just tired of being seen as a nail by imbeciles that only have hammers.

  • by mrbuckles ( 201938 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @05:29AM (#764436)
    Can you blame employees who don't want to become intimately involved with a company?

    So far, every company that I've worked for has had a "downsizing" (or "reorganization" or "resource action" -- my favorite -- or whatever euphamistic label they want to attach to firing people). Given that, and the prospect that similar actions will continue, some find it pointless to become attached to people with whom they work.

    Now, compound the above with the increase in hours worked per week. (Note: people in other countries may work more hours, but if you're used to working 40 hours a week and now work 50, you have less free time.) If your available free time is less, do you want to use it playing softball with the people you're already spending more time with? ("Gee, Chuck, I know you've just worked 70 hours a week for the last month, but I'm disappointed you skipped the picnic the company so generously arranged for us.")

    Companies have for a long time shown less loyalty to employees than in the past. This is changing, now, because it's a "seller's market" for hi-tech employees. My feeling -- too little, too f**king late.

  • What does the Namibian tribesman actually posess that would be of any value to a person engaged in something that is done in the modern world.

    Personally Namabian tribesmen only have access to the information and knowledge of their peers. They spend their entire lives alone with their thoughts and live a substince life where basic animal urges rule the roost so to speak. As much as I want to have to constantly worry about where my next meal is comming from of what will happen to my life if the next season dosn't bring good rain I really don't.

    The life of a farmer/herder/hunter&gatherer is a crappy one that not many people like. Farmers usually spend almost all their time working and worrying from sunup to sundown. I personally knew of a professor who was raised on a farm not to mention my own dad and basically you work from sun-up to sun-down until you are dead on your feet. It's not fun.

    The inexact colloquial term you are looking for is "street smarts" which I do not equate with either information or knowledge.
  • writing isn't great but workable

    Pot and kettle anyone?

    Abashed the Devil stood,
    And felt how awful goodness is

  • Of course you want dedicated workers but I doubt in the real world anybody expects to be forcing you to do more and more work. Besides at least in the United States you get paid 150% of your normal salary if you in fact do work any over time. In this respect they *don't* want you to work any more time than normal.

    You're assuming that the poor bastard working overtime is being paid hourly and isn't salaried...



    -------
  • Jon Katz is Disconnected from reality.

  • I play music. I have for more than half my life. (I'm 25) When 5pm hits, I'm out the door. I go practice or I go record something, or I go to a club.

    Heh, you think you're annoyed by the article... My situation is similar but even more extreme/ironic. I temp in large part because I want to stand exempt from any corporation's culture, because.... I'm a musician (25 years). However, unlike you I'm not rushing off from work to do solo work. I rush off to practice or gig with my 10+ member dance band and the 10+ member a cappella singing group. To refer to me as an "isolate" is hysterical.

    If I'm so freeken "isolate" WTF do I spend all my spare time dealing with large groups of people?

    Katz, don't confuse a healthy sense of alienation with being "isolated".
    ----------------------------------------------

  • There may be more cars in New jersey than the whole of Africa. However, there are more Mercedes-Benz dealerships in Africa than in New Jersey.

    They may not buy many, but damn! They've got taste!
  • The main focus of the essay was on being disconnected and the previous poster was mentioning lack of network/computer connectivity for individuals in India. The post is based on these topics.
  • What irritates me is that a company is funding the development of network infrastructure and connectivity when people who live in the USA are still without net access. It's kind of like dealing with African refuges when we have homeless, poor, and disadvantaged right here at home.

    Uhhhhhhm I'm sorry: precisely *what* makes you believe that you, as a resident of the USA, in some manner have a 'right' to connectivity, such that a company devoting resources to connectivity outside the US is an infringement on you?

    Go out and buy a freakin' phone line and a modem. If you have a decent job, get DSL or a leased line. Don't complain in a public forum because other countries in the world are getting basic 8-year-old comms technology developed?

    There is *NO* way anyone with a rational mind can argue that an american has any right to connectivity. You have what you pay for / invest time, energy and smarts in learning to use. That's life.

    ~cHris

  • Wresch was the chair of the CIS Dept. at UW - Stevens Point up until '96 or 97', maybe 98'. Somewhere around there. The UW system has quite a few campuses around the state. I think it is safe to assume they left out the Stevens Point part because if wouldn't sound as prestigious.

    Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip on their shoulder that big!
  • There is an incredible amount of information accessible to those of us who are 'connected', but how much of that information is worth anything. Most of what passes for news today is not news at all. Most of the 'facts' reported will later be found to be either inaccurate or complete fabrications within twenty years or so.

    What are the isolates isolated from anyway? From what someone outside of their circle deems important. Do remote tribal people feel isolated? I would imagine that they feel far more connected with one another than those of us who are connected only through the ether. Aren't we all to some extent isolated (or insulated perhaps) from most of the rest of the world? By the definition (as I understood it) of this author, most of our leaders are isolates, depending on a cadre of 'connected' individuals to sort through the flotsam and jetsam of the information cesspool to locate the important information -- the kind of stuff one needs in order to make an informed decision.

    I know, some of you will say, "I don't want to be dependant on others for my information. I do my own research." The fact is we who are 'connected' don't do our own research for most things. We cruise around the net looking for information that is provided by others and then we decide which information is valid and which is not (usually based upon our own mental filters rather than the validity of the data -- discounting sources here and accepting others that validate what we already believe).

  • I may tend to agree that forcing culture onto a not-so-cohesive group may not be the best idea, buy if you've got an odd-man-out situation, then you can't just leave it there...I know how bad this sounds. Maybe I've always been lucky in terms of employment of having mostly good coworkers, and as such social atmosphere was very manageable and often included intramural sports. But to say that companies shouldn't try is foolish. That just creates apathy. Apathy is always bad.

  • Holy Shit? A Beowulf cluser of Jon Katzes? Wouldn't having such a large mass of stupid so close together cause Jon to colapse in on himself, thus causing a singularity of stupid. This 'Black Hole of Ignorance' would quickly start sucking in all clueful posts, leaving SlashDot full of retarded posts.
  • It's not just company picnics.

    I freelance in medical information writing, and occasionally work in-house with my main client. It's a very typical tech setting, so typical that the "perk's" -- free sodas and snacks, fooseball -- have been lampooned in local recruiting adds. What I found surprising was how little work got done in the meantime, despite looming deadlines. Sure there was bonding with the CEO, but did that get the job done? I was glad to be on an hourly-rate clock to avoid all that.

    I grew up near Disney, and have had my fill of the "Rah-Rah" crap. In my arrogant opinion, it only works with those firmly under the middle of the bell curve.

  • Katz cites a range of "27%-50%", but from my own experience, it's really more like "40%-60%". I was hired by one of the smaller Fortune 500 companies to do some consulting on company morale, and that's the range I came up with, but it's interesting what methodology I had to use.

    You see, you can't do regular survey work when looking for these data -- employees either don't bother to fill them out, or they do fill them out but lie, hoping to kiss up to management or simply not jeopardize their jobs.

    You might think you could just measure attendance at these events. But people do have good reasons for not coming, like busy personal lives or kids to drive to soccer games, etc. And measuring attendance at alcohol-laced cocktail parties on Fridays doesn't help either, since most people do stop by on their way out, for a quick beer if nothing else.

    So, we had to come up with a unique methodology to implement. And I bet you'll never guess what we used: bathroom breaks. We installed cameras in the ir-activation mechanisms on those automatic toilets the company had installed two years previously, and we cross-matched bathroom-goers with the company facebook. It turns out, so-called "corporate isolates" are more likely to take frequent bathroom breaks, where they can escape the banter of coworkers (and decrease productivity at the same time). Like I said, the range came out to about "40%-60%", and needless to say, management was not pleased.

    An interesting footnote, though, was the number of managers who also fit the profile according to our methodology. You'd think they'd be more likely to interact with others, being managers and all, but you'd be mistaken.
  • They showed an African tribesman holding a sign for IBM. Surely this author is mistaken :)
  • Uhhhhhhm I'm sorry: precisely *what* makes you believe that you, as a resident of the USA, in some manner have a 'right' to connectivity, such that a company devoting resources to connectivity outside the US is an
    infringement on you?


    Because a bunch of Indian peseants aren't the focus of society or industry for Americans to worry about when there are massive social problems right here at home. I say if the Indian people want access make them pay through the nose for it like we did in the early days of the internet. We shouldn't be bailing out another country and leave our own with slaves.

    Go out and buy a freakin' phone line and a modem. If you have a decent job, get DSL or a leased line. Don't complain in a public forum because other countries in the world are getting basic 8-year-old comms
    technology developed?


    Check and double check. I have one land line and a 2400 baud modem. And I run linux. There should be not problem right? Wrong the rather stupid ISPs like Juno don't seem to get it through their head that they screwed me as a loyal customer when freewwweb closed. Linux was supported by them and worked extremely well. The the idiots take and "extent" the ppp protocol that is the mainstay for real communication and prevent anyone from using it. And they have the gall never to release a linux port despite need by a large number of people to have such a port done.

    There is *NO* way anyone with a rational mind can argue that an american has any right to connectivity. You have what you pay for / invest time, energy and smarts in learning to use. That's life.

    As long as the internet and it's inherent use are a prerequisite for doing *anything* and it becomes such a major issue and such you really do need it.

    Take recent versions of windows. It's almost impossible to actually use some apps (like Word 2000) without registering first via an online connection first. Then windows "needs" to update itself via some form of online manner and also needs access. Not to mention to numbers of collegiate classes that are now going online for the interaction and using the web as a medium to turn solutions to problems (physics comes to mind). So yes I think that with all the emphasis on net connectivity and the fact that it's becomming a freebie option for almost all the net you *cannot* justify to me that it isn't a right. It's just simply baffling why people ignore linux with regard to the use of free ISPs. How damn hard is it to simply port your damn code to something that would give you more eyeballs. And don't give me the worn out excuse that linux makes it trivial to prevent seeing ads. You can program linux to prevent access without seeing ads. And you can bypass the ads on windows as well with a little bit of cleaver programming knowledge.
  • He says it's impossible to imagine any Japanese organization reporting 7% alienated employees, much less 50%.

    Based on this kind of reporting, it's a wonder that any of the book's stats are reliable.

    So what if less Japanese feel "disconnected" than Americans? That in itself says very little, since there's a significant difference culturally beyond the confines of corporate life. A rough analogy would be:

    "It's considered possible that a far greater percentage of Star Wars fans are familiar with Jabba the Hut than an equivalent group of Gone With the Wind buffs."

    Japanese culture has a much stronger bias toward group membership, whereas the US is much more concerned with individuality as an ideal. This goes for school, social interaction and any number of other aspects of daily life. But I wouldn't say that this differeence is the some reason why more Americans feel disconnected, nor would I say that the different percentage proves anything beyond the author's proven ability to type the numbers "7" and 50".

    The fact that the author uses meaningless stats like these to support what seems to be a pretty empty concept in the first place indicates that this is more an effort to sell books than to actually say something worth listening to.

  • eriously, IBM went to India and upgraded the technology there from 13th century to 19th century.

    Seriously wrong. India kicked IBM out of the country in the mainframe era because IBM wouldn't go for local ownership. As a result, computing in India skipped the mainframe era; for a long time DEC was the dominant vendor.

  • by hey! ( 33014 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @06:08AM (#764455) Homepage Journal
    The ability to function in isolation is dependent upon the tasks you do and how they fit into the whole. In particular if the overall task can be partitioned into well defined subtasks or jobs.

    The classic example is the Shaker barn raising. While the people are working together, they are essentially autonomous. People get together with a pile of wood in the morning and at the end of the day they end up with a barn. They've done so many of these things anybody can simply see the next thing to be done that he is capable of. When this kind of structure works, it is perfect because there is no wasted time put into management or meetings. So -- routine performance of easily partitioned tasks of moderate complexity work well in the autonomous mode.

    On the other hand, consider the Bletchley park scenario. While each cryptanalyst works alone on a particular message, they may call in others with a special knack, and need to meet to develop and share new methods. Extremely difficult creative work then requires give and take and considerable interaction with coworkers.

    Now consider the job of processing insurance claims. It is very routine, predictable, with measurable success metrics; on the other hand change does happen occaisionally and procedures must be altered. This is an environment tailor made for hierarchy (i.e. bureaucracy).

    Now look at your own organization. It probably has elements of all three of these models, and perhaps others.

    From a purely functional standpoint, different tasks require that organizations different social structures. Most require that people know each other and communicate on a regular basis. What goes on around the water cooler is often more important than appears. I once talked to a groupware expert who was working on a job for a large insurance company. New top management had looked at the org chart and identified a layer of management with no identifiable purpose. Using B-school logic, they eliminated it, only to find out that layer dealt with tasks having to do with vital interdepartmental coordination.

    It's nice to have friends at work too. Many if not most people are happier being part of a team than being an anonymous productive factor.

  • If everybody had a DSL connexion and could write Perl poems and everybody had stock options worth gajillions, who'd be making our bean burritos and Dr. Pepper???

    The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk

  • Excuse me: American corporations do not DESERVE to be our communities.

    All human beings have to a greater or lesser extent a hunger for community. It is an itch we all need to scratch, regardless of whether we are introverts or extroverts.

    But just because we desire and enjoy and possibly even need it, does not make us stupid. And just as, even though thirsty we are smart enough not to drink poisoned water, many of us are clever enough not to try to sate our appetite for human connection on the poisonous pseudo-culture in the workplace!

    In Western culture, there is this idea of not mixing business and pleasure. This isn't just some archaic uptightness -- it's a self-defense mechanism for employees. (See Miss Manners, of all authors, for technical explication.)

    Community exterts tremendous power over its members. Your employer already controls your entire financial situation (and possibly your relationship with your doctor, and day care for your kids, etc.) The business/pleasure dichotomy keeps the business world from seizing the power of community, too.

    Or put it another way, if the time you could have spent growing friendships outside of your place of employment you spend socializing with your co-workers.... if you try to leave that job, precisely whom do you know to network with to get a job somewhere else? If pissing off the boss means everyone you hang out with no longer wants to risk being seen with you, how often will you stick your neck out?

    Of course corporations want more community in the work place -- they'd love for every time an employee thinks about quitting, they also think "but then I'd have to leave all my friends!" They want hostages!

    And trust them (and apparently the author of this book) to deliberately confuse community with communications. Communications, boy-os, is something that starts from the top, and implies little about emotional interactions. Yah don't have to like each other to talk to each other about work. (That's called "Professionalism", BTW.) Community is completely about emotional relationships.

    Yeah, corporate america keeps looking for ways to manipulate its workers into submission. Now it's community. Last year it was "family" [fastcompany.com], and, get this, religion.

    Companies don't deserve that kind of power over us. And we are not defective for refusing to grant it them!
    ------------------------------------------- ---

  • Once you learn to ignore people proximate to you,
    this disconnection starts.

    I think this is a problem with our culture, brought on especially in population centers. It's been growing ever since transportation/communication advances gave us the luxury of being able to ignore the people around us (that is, those who live close or are otherwise in proximity to us) during the day. Why be neighborly when you can go/talk anywhere? So you learn to be personally disproximate. Then you start at work...

    An example of the neighbor thing: the other day, my girlfriend and I dropped by her old apartment, to see if some mail had come there for her. When we got there, there was a guy wandering around inside with a flashlight. No lights on. Very strange. She knocked on the door anyway, and the guy was very short with her. We became suspicious, and even more so when he finally turned on a light, because that meant he _could_ have had the light on the whole time. We waffled about what to do, and then finally decided to knock on the doors of the two neighboring apartments and see if they knew who their new neighbors were and if it matched the description of who my gf saw. Did they know their neighbors? Of course not. Heck, they wouldn't even answer the door at first, they were wrapped up enough in what was on TV, and they didn't even open the door when they did come to it (I am not a threatening looking person, either).

    We get far too good at ignoring those around us.
  • I'm the most culturally isolated person at my place of work, but I am by far the most technicaly savy. For the most part this is because I am the only tech here (a department of one). I don't need to know any of the intrigue and politicking going on, or the details of jobs and contracts. All I need to know is what's not working and when to setup machines for new employees. Otherwise I go hermit mode in my office or the server room. I don't mind, they don't mind, and we are all happy.

    There is also the fact that the male to female ratio here is about 1:10. Most of the watercooler discussions are of no interest to me and can easily move into territory I don't want to go to.

  • * from 13th century to 19th century.*

    Wot? steam engines, lead piping, and the Velocipede?

    Go IBM! That's one company with it's finger on the pulse.

  • Why is it so surprising that most people don't "connect" with their work organization etc. and play on the softball team etc.?

    I think it's because most of us work for our company to live not live to work for our company. I enjoy my work, the company I work for has good working conditions - but let's face it, I really don't want to spend any more time there than necessary - especially doing sports that I find boring!

    Management does occasionally forget that, and you get the "not a team player" etc. comments. However, with the difficulty in hiring people in our industry at the moment, it's easy to remind management you work here to live, not live to work here - by reminding them you can quit if they make you work any more unpaid overtime.

    Now if we had a bowling team in our department, yes - I would do that, but that's because it's something I enjoy and I can drink beer whilst doing it ;-)

  • I take frequent bathroom breaks too, but that's cause I drink water all the time. And all I know is there better not be any cameras in our facilities!

    Why couldn't you use a counter or something? I think it's an invasion of privacy to install cameras in the toilets! Are you looking for a lawsuit or something?
  • That's what I associate that with.
  • I think the reason geeks are 'disconnected' is because they're much more preocupied with other stuff, like the program they started at home, or the book they're reading, or how the hell does a PAUSE frame work on a full-duplex network?
    The information technology field has more than enough information to keep one busy for a lifetime, and geeks who develop that uncontrollable thirst for knowledge try to gain as much as possible without waisting time.
    So why go to the company picnic and waste 10 minutes reading newsletters when you could read man pages, books and write code instead?
    That's the reason I'm disconnected. And I think I speak for quite a few people. It's not something bad. In fact, developing this interest in computers and everything related to them is the best thing that's ever happened to me...
    --------------
  • In my arrogant opinion, it only works with those firmly under the middle of the bell curve.

    I wish that were true. Unfortunately, some corps have people clever enough to come up with things which appeal to geeks, and, unfortunately, there are pleanty of emotionally vulnerable geeks. It's just like a cult.

    The temptation for many geeks (in those work environments which manage to forgo the geek-repelling activities for the geek-attracting) is a ready-made social life. You don't have to deal with the effort of initiating social interactions or maintaining relationships. You never have to pick up a phone and call someone, never risk getting an email say "sorry, I'm busy", never have to make the first move with strangers. All you have to do is show up, and *poof*, you've got drinking buddies.
    ---------------------------------------- ------

  • In some ways, you a very, very right. I love singing, and remember joining a choir my first year of college. They insisted that we have lots of socials and that we have "bonding" meetings periodically. Eventually, another guy in the group and I took to calling it the "choir cult." And I've worked for places where activities were likewise (though in a lesser degree) an attempt to create an ersatz sense of community/loyalty/warm fuzzy feelings.

    But I've also worked for places that actually had this feeling. They never demanded that work become your life, that they became your whole community, and they mostly did they cool activities because they thought it would be fun (OK, the trip to see "Bugs Life" was professional review of what was happening in the field, but everything else was for fun).

    I recently read a book called "In His Steps" by Charles Shelton. I think it's the origin of the phrase "What would Jesus do?" Now, before you non-christians mock me off slashdot, hold up: the book is really about a group of people who reexamine their ethics and take them very seriously in ALL areas of their life. That's a powerful thing. The reason I bring this up is that in the book some of the people reexamine their ethics in the workplace. They notice their neighbor. Some of those people run businesses. This doesn't necessarily result in everybody being best friends, but it does result in people being treated better and more fairly. A better place to work. Businesses SHOULD pay attention to the human factor of relationships. People don't have to get up in the middle of quarterly reviews and say "I LOVE you, man" -- that's suspect anyway. But having some social contact with people at work and remembering that they're human beings is almost always a good idea.
  • It's obvious that a large portion of the world remains unconnected and lives a simpler life

    Different, not necessarily simpler. There IS a difference, though we tend to equate technological advancement with complexity.

    --
  • Couldn't agree more. I once managed to hold down a job for a magnificent 14 minutes Things started badly when everyone at the table with me got up one at a time and yelled their days achivements at the top of their lungs to the boss. When he then stood up and said 'we will now sing the company song' and everyone 'cept me got up and took him seriously I think in his mind I was halfway out the door. the thing that really did it was that I finally described my days work as 'enlightening' in a tone that was (hopefully) dripping with irony. By the time I'd returned to my house he'd already phoned to say that he didn't think that I really fitted in with the company.

    Some firms just aren't worth working for.
  • You seem to be under the impression that American corporations need to operate under some sort of socialistic principles. I'm sorry, but that doesnt compute. No corporation owes you anything - unless you work for it, and then all it owes you is a paycheck. This is capitalism 101.

    The reason IBM is in India and improving the technology there is out of pure self-interest. It can tap into the highly skilled cheap labour force to offload projects to India. How the heck can IBM do this if the telcommunications and the computing infrastructure arent upto the task? There is no socialistic motive here, and if IBM chooses to ignore the "massive social problems right here at home" while doing stuff in India, you'll just have to deal with it, wont you?

  • Who's posing? You're the one who forgot to log in.

  • Actually you're right, all 40,000 students at UW-Madison, all 5,000,000 residents of Wisconsin, and the millions more from the Midwest are all "pathologically sports-obsessed." Way to make a stereotype pal. That sounds just like someone who lives a couple of blocks off the campus of MIT.

    Sincerely,
    A Typical UW-Madison Student
  • >Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with
    >athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last >for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip
    >on their shoulder that big!

    That describes me pretty well. Beyond that, if you're a guy in Madison, and you're not a jock, it's next to impossible to get a date. And I refused to lower myself to that level. I'd rather leave town.
  • I think a lot of people will find my situation to be very common to theirs... No one else does what I do in this company. I'm either in the server room or my office debugging this or tweaking that. The major diff between me and everyone else is that I always have something to do. I'm usually so entrenched in my work that I hardly notice what happens around me socially. If no one would bother me all day I'd get by saying all of 10 words to 5 people on the way to the coffee machine and back. They're all really cool people but they are still "users". This isn't a professional caste system but a matter of priority. They have all day to process checks and fill in the blanks. I'm the one who has to have this research completed by then and be ready to implement that while fixing a BSOD'd server.
  • Hmmm well you actually can prevent IBM from giving *any* aid to india quite easily. Basically make sure that IBM cannot conduct international trade with India on order of the federal government. India can become a rouge nation and all problems are solved.
  • by Boone^ ( 151057 ) on Thursday September 21, 2000 @06:44AM (#764475)
    For some reason I'd have never thought that the campus in my hometown would ever get mentioned on /. Call me crazy. :P

    The state of Wisconsin does have quite a few Public University campuses... Let's see, my favorite is UW-Madison, a place I spent 4 great years studying to be an EE _as_well_as_ rooting on Ron Dayne and the rest of the Badgers. ;-)

    Then there's all the UW State Schools-> UW-Stevens Point, UW-LaCrosse, UW-Milwaukee, UW-Eau Claire, Stout, Superior, Green Bay, Whitewater, Park Side, Platteville, (is that all?) and that doesn't even include the numerous UW Centers around the state. Many apologies to the campuses I've forgotten.
  • *working and worrying from sunup to sundown.*

    Actually I think the word you were looking for is 'drinking'.

    I was raised on a farm, and one thing the lifestyle does have is reality - a sense of now, thing.

    I miss that...

  • Disclaimer: I think your original article made it sound as if you held views to a fervour which you apparently don't. I apologise for ranting. However: We shouldn't be bailing out another country and leave our own with slaves. You aren't. Trust me, IBM are making money. Maybe not immediate money, but the development of infrastructure is definitely in their interest.

    Oh yes, and half their programmers live in india, too.

    I have one land line and a 2400 baud modem. And I run linux.

    Ah. Snippage here btw. All of a sudden a whole different rant is developing here. You're complaning, not that some inherent right to having internet connectivity is being infringed, but that you have chosen to use a collection of software which the ISP you have chosen to use is not friendly with. I *can't* believe that you don't have a choice of ISP. I *can't* believe that *none* of the available options will let you use standard PPP dialup. Even the European ISP's let you do that.

    Your initial post very much sounded as if you believed that network connectivity was a 'self-evident' right for all americans and that so long as you didn't have connectivity, no networks should ever be built outside the united states. I realize now that you do not believe this. My apologies for ranting.

    However, you do still seem to believe that a bunch of Indian peseants aren't the focus of society or industry for Americans to worry about. Excuse me? In what way does nationality impact on internet access? And in what way is IBM (to quote the original company) or in fact any other company like Cisco, HP, whatever, an 'American' industry? They may have started there, but they certainly aren't contained there. (Some might wish they were... not I, I must add.)

    you *cannot* justify to me that it isn't a right. Probably true, but all this statement means is that you have a closed mind on the topic. Assuming you're talking about internet access here: of course it's not a freaking right. Any more than university education is a right. University education is expensive, demanding, takes time to go through, and gives substantial rewards if used wisely, but not if not. It's a very good parallel for access to the "information age", to use a cliche. It is a requirement for alot of life's benefits. *AND?* You work for it, you get the breaks, you qualify for it. That's the same with the internet: I have connectivity because I've worked my ass off to learn how to use it and to get a job which allows me to afford it.

    It's just simply baffling why people ignore linux with regard to the use of free ISPs. Using a free ISP is a choice, not a right, nor is it something forced on anyone. You choose to use a free ISP, you choose to use windows, is basically what you're saying. Where's the problem? Choose to pay for your internet access, get a better service. That's economics in action in everyday life. You pays your money, you makes your choice. Free internet access *is*not* a right.

    you can bypass the ads on windows as well with a little bit of clever programming knowledge. Which in the case of a market-signifcant percentage of the population you can guarantee the user does not posess if they use windows. In the OS community, the chances of your user being a programmer are significantly higher. But beyond that, the point about linux is that the user is in control. The point about free ISP's is that the ISP is control. Do the math.

    ~cHris

  • I think it's an invasion of privacy to install cameras in the toilets!

    Perhaps, but what they don't know can't hurt them.

    Are you looking for a lawsuit or something?

    Actually, this is the funny part: that we're immune. You know those fine-legal-print documents all employees have to sign before starting? That company wisely inserted a clause about "conducting information-gathering for occupational-research purposes".

    Cheers,
    Froido
  • Fostering a corporate culture where courtesy and respect are expected at all times is simply good management practice. It's not the same thing as expecting people to tie their social lives and work together. I gather that you're talking about the former.
    /.
  • 1. anti fraternization rules: most companies have some sort of anti fraternization policy (IE: don't date coworkers). Due to our equal opportunity laws, a large number of your coworkers are of the opposite sex, socializing with your coworkers puts you in danger of meeting someone you click with leaving you with the dilemma of violating company policy or suffering in silence.

    2. sexual harassment: in this day and age, simply talking to the opposite sex can be considered sexual harassment, best not to.

    3. why make enemies: if you socialize with your coworkers, you are bound to find at least one person who doesn't like you, and given the nature of the universe, they will immediately be promoted to be your boss.

    4. nothing in common: face it, everyone outside your department is a complete loser, what would you talk about.
  • It appears that the poster alread HAS connectivity. Take a pill, dude. Heh. Yeah, I missed that dig.. I got very annoyed by the apparent arrogance of the posters opinions. As sips' reply to me made clear, he didn't actually think the way it looked like he did.

    And as someone else has succinctly said above, IBM et al are *not* playing savior to third world: they're in it strictly for the money.

    `ttfn,

    ~cHris

  • Just so you're aware of it, putting farmers and herders together in a group with hunter/gatherers is basically a nonsense aggregation. Farming and herding are intentional and controlled activities (in terms of resource usage), whereas hunting and gathering implies a sense that resources are not planned or controlled in any real way.

    I'm not sure you're asking the right questions about the Namibian tribemembers either, the question is, "what does the modern world have that is of any value to them?" especially when you consider the likely trend in America for people to associate with those that they don't even like (i.e. the "isolates" in the article/book) simply because they get paid to do so-- the corporate family (if you can get people to subscribe to it) is no substitute for tribal or real family relationships which are lifelong and have deeper meaning to most participants. I certainly don't think characterizing their tribal lives as ruled by basic animal urges discerns at all between them and Americans. I can't think of a single human culture that is comparable to a group of non-human animals. Humans have language, mythology, advanced use of tools (even in the most basic societies), rituals, and many other things which put them in a different class entirely than, say, a band of chimps. The commonalities between human groups far outweigh the differences. I don't know that a Namibian tribe member is any more/less worried about where his/her next meal is coming from than you are. They may have a less efficient means of obtaining the meal, but whether they are worried about it is another issue. Finally, just because one is not a hunter/gatherer, or even a farmer/herder, there is no guarantee that the work will not be "sun-up to sun-down". Many geeks work hours at least this long, many middle-to-upper level managers work those sorts of hours. Factory workers rarely get to work just eight hours (which is actually longer than daylight where I live for several months a year), there is plenty of forced overtime to go around-- especially in a period of low unemployment like this.
  • I dunno why anyone is surprised at there being this kind of disparity. Even though computers and their associated services have come down drmatically in price, the toll to get on the Internet makes it largely the domain of middle class folks. Add in the knowledge toll to function there, and your average working class or lower person is gonna say the heck with it. They have too many other things to worry about. Get things down to the price of say a vcr and add in true plug and play set up, then this will change. Before we see the information access gap disappear the undlerlying tech has got to become as ubiquitous as cable tv and about as easy to use. This is happening pretty fast, so I'd expect to see a cultural change on Internet again in the next few of years identical to the one when AOL and others companies started providing easy Internet access. In the meantime, you see an Internet population that is pretty well educated and pretty affulent all things considered. So we have a gap today, but I doubt its going to be there for too much longer as the devices and services become cheaper and easier to use.

    The real gap is in how people use the access to information. Lots of us here use the Internet as social medium, a place to collaborate on projects be they technical, artistic, political or whatever. We also use the Internet as the world's greatest reference collection. We're very well informed because we know the information is out there and how to look for it. Now, lets look at them. For someone neither technical savvy nor educated will the Internet be anything more than mall? That's where there real gap is going to be: In the ablity of people to use their access to information effectively.

    As for the rest of the world: It looks as though those nations that are doing the hard work to achieve political and economic stablity will be able to build the necessary infrastructure for Internet access. The more important gap as the developing world emerges from a century political turmoil will be in what the stable governments allow their citizens to see. Take China for instance. Five years ago the Internet barely existed there. Now, its becoming more and more common in the cities, but the government restricts what the citizens can see. Whether or not their policy is effective I leave to another discussion(read I don't know). We're going to see a drastic difference in the way different geographical regions use the Internet. What will this mean in practical terms? Who knows. Its really too soon to say. In my opinion the gap is not going to be about technology and development, but in cultural and political views about information and ideas. Either way, this sounds like a good book to read.

    In terms of the other issues about isolation at work. What the heck cares? In America we've never identified as strongly with an employer as say the Japanese have. We identify with professions. "I am programmer." "I am a geek." "I am a plumber." What we do is much more important than who we do it for. Companies that are effective and successful at their business find ways to get their people to talk to one and other independent of social activities. They don't leave such things to chance or the mercenary attitude of the worker. A justified attitude I might add given the lack of loyalty companies demostrate to their workers, but that's a whole other issue.

  • Basically make sure that IBM cannot conduct international trade with India on order of the federal government. India can become a rouge nation and all problems are solved.

    *boggle*. Am I actually reading this in what looked at first glance like a forum for the intelligent?

    ~cHris

  • I'm not sure what it is about Jon Katz that would make him explicitly, or even implicitly, socialist or Marxist. Marx was a strong humanist who believed that matching people with meaningful work would free people's abilities to create art, music, and an overall joyful & just society, which is quite different from the assertion of the author of this book, to which Katz seems sympathetic, that people should spend more time at jobs which are only semi-meaningful.

    Ayn Rand was certainly a prolific writer, but I'm not sure that reading what she wrote would save anyone's mind, even if she did advocate for personal responsibility, which is always healthy. Saving people's minds is more what professional psychological help is for, donch'a think? Dogma has never made me more sane.
  • After living in Madison for twelve years and growing entirely sick and tired of the drunken crowds that swarm around Camp Randall. Don't try to pin this on MIT; I'm just looking to live further away from the hordes of crazed sports fans.

    I feel the success of the UW's sports program has cheapened my degree. Now I have to say that I went to a "football school" rather than a University.
  • I had a similar reaction to this review, but without having read the book, I can't tell if it's Katz or Wresch who's confusing two unrelated topics.

    As far as the "information have-nots" are concerned, while this is a problem, I don't think it's as big of a problem as politicians like to claim. The income gap between tech and non-tech workers is as large as it is because of a temporary shortage of tech workers drives up wages, and because the traditional financial sector is still learning how to sort out sound business plans from hot air and bullshit in the tech sector. (The deflation of absurd IPO stock prices is a sign that the financial sector is catching on.) In time, the gap will narrow because tech wages will fall as the supply of workers meets the demand. Anyone remember what it was like trying to score a decent salary as a programmer around, oh, 1985?

    The more important issue that the book talks about, so-called "isolates", really worries me. What Wresch is talking about reviving is the corporate paternalism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Maybe Wresch thinks it would be a good idea if we all got involved in our jobs to the exclusion of a separate social life, but neither company towns nor scrip nor total loss of privacy really appeal to me. If it becomes a problem that I don't belong to the company softball team, I'll find another company. I already have a social life in the form of that traditional refuge for the "alienated" -- my people call it friends and family.

    --

  • I've read and re-read all of your posts on this, and I have realized something after stopping myself from responding hastily several times. What you are forgetting is fairly simple, although to you it may not be fair. Business. Business operates not out of any need to contribute to society but to make money. Charity is a great word to add into PR material. I suspect that IBM dumping machines and cash into India and African nations has more to do with them realizing that at some point, these countries will move into the information age. When that happens, IBM will be in a great position, because of this 'goodwill'.

    Similarly, Freewwweb was a company, interested in making money. Their business plan did not work, so it was either time for them to revise their business plan, or to go out of business, whatever happened to them, they didn't, nor did they need to consult their clients on the decision. Unless you are a major investor, Juno and Freewwweb owe you exactly nothing.

    Still on business, most Linux users can afford a connection. Moreover, Windows still dominates the desktop, home-user market by at least 80%. Companies go for the numbers, not to cater to every possible eventuality. Again, they are in business to make money, not to foster goodwill to every possible customer.

    As for rights... I need a car to get to my job that is not accessible by public transportation. Is it my right to have my car subsidized? Don't forget, 'emphasis' has nothing to do with real need.

    Further, if you can afford a copy of Office 2000, then you can surely afford a net connection. If you are running Linux then why are you worried anyway? There are free alternatives for most programs. None that I know of require a net connection to use or register. If you could point out some real-world examples of important tasks that can ONLY be performed online (no meatspace alternative at all) then I might be inclined to lean in your favor, but there is nothing that comes to mind that would justify socialized internet connections for the American masses.
  • Wow, maybe your employees are so alienated because the of the Orwellian tactics of your company. I know I would quit instantly if I ever learned that a company I worked for installed cameras in the bathroom!!

    Michelle

  • Hmmm...

    Yup. I remember being forced to take those sociology courses. After all, you really need those courses in order to become a well rounded systems engineer, right? Geez....One of the things that really bugged me about those classes was the flawed statistical drivel that was touted as gospel. But anyway, I digress...

    The book basically takes the division of classes to the next level... Yeah, ok, sounds again like something from Sociology 101! What does the author propose to span this rift and break down these "class barriers"? Should this be similar to Pol Pot's idea except in reverse: we march everyone out of the fields and place them in cyber-gulags? (Sorry, one of my Soc instructors had the odd opinion that Pol Pot's original idea was sound but the implementation was flawed! Talk about yer... oops, again I digress!) What will we eat? Soylent Green?

    Anyway, but back to the original topic: in regards to human interaction, I see electronically based information as an isolating factor. When was the last time you walked down to the corner store to buy the newspaper? (For me, only on Sundays... mostly for the sales/coupons, comics and TV guide sections of the paper... been a long time since I read the paper in-depth for news!)

    BTW: the only people from work with whom I socialise after business hours are those who would have become my friends had I met them elsewhere. I don't work for a social club, and therefore, should not have to socialise at or with work!

    -dean
    -----------------------
  • I went to UW Madison, my impression was that people were a lot more into beer and punk rock bands in dirty basements than sports.

    Of course, that was probably just the people I hung out with... God I miss those days.

    "Free your mind and your ass will follow"

  • Thsi review made my head hurt.

    Your mispelling aside, I believe you have just stumbled over Katz's main purpose in life, to make people's heads hurt.

    I'm just really glad that there are enough authors out there writing what I like to call 'techno-propaganda' to keep Katz occupied. I'd hate to have to read Katz review a good fiction book and ruin my opinion of sci-fi or fantasy forever. I swear, if I saw some correlation between my favorite fantasy books and some of Katz's cockamamy, "The countries of the world will come to end and currency will only matter on the web" type of theories I would stop reading altogether.

    Considering that I've already given up on TV for the most part, that would leave me with only sitting a drooling to occupy my free time.

    Moderators: By all means, mark this as flamebait. Katz creates a firey anger in me that causes me to flame anyone and everyone I see.
  • You know, the real problem with books (and theories, and newspaper articles) which "address" the social ramifications of the 'net is that they usually try to compress multiple orthagonal axes into one simple either/or statement.

    Consider:

    • Techno-philic vs. Techno-phobic
      Whether or not you are inclined to use the tech. An issue of psychology.

    • Net using vs. non Net-using
      Whether you have access, or not. This is a financial issue.
    • Introvert vs. Extrovert
      Whether you need more solitude or more socializing. Both are equally healthy and valid psychological make ups.
    • Community member vs. non-affiliated
      Whether you're in one or not, independent of how you feel about them. An issue of fact, not opinion.
    • Relationship rich vs. relationship poor
      Whether you're getting your personal quota of relationships in your life. An issue of personal opinion.
    • Socially active in real.life vs. not
      Whether you are socializing in the meat world. A subjective judgement of quantity.
    • Socially adept vs. socially inept
      Whether or not you are any good at it. A subjective judgement of quality.
    • Willing to socialize at work vs. not willing to socialize at work
      A personal policy decision.

    All of these are completely distinct. But pundits keep trying to squash them into a single dichotomy. That's where we get absurdities like "Does net use make people more socially isolated?" to which the answer can only be "mu!"

    Where do I fit into their little equation? An introvert (needs little socialization) who is technophilic (likes computers) and net-using (a technology-have), a community member (strong sense of belonging), relationship rich (not needy of more relationships), and highly socially active and adept in meat space (out with people most nights of the week), and unwilling to socialize at work (a cultural choice)?

    What of the smart but extroverted coder who has the misfortune to live in a technical backwater, where most of the other geeks have moved away; hungry for more socialization, but unable to meet physicially with peers or find an accepting community in the real world, and unable to fit-in at work but gives it a shot?

    What of the technophobic deaf person using a borrowed computer to connect to the net at 14.4baud, because, despite not wanting to have to deal with the technology, it is the only way to really interact on an equal footing with the hearies?

    There is no room in their impoverished models for our personal realities, which is why those models so piss us off.


    ----------------------------------------------
  • I enjoy my job, I like the people that I work with. I more than happy to listen to how thier day is going and such, however, they are co-workers, they have a seperate private life and as do I.

    I think (IMHO) that these should be kept seperate unless deemed necessary, I don't think this is alienation, I think this is respect for not "dumping" on your co-workers and also not letting your life interfere with your work, now if I can figure how to do the opposite I will be a step ahead :)

    Team spirit is in working together to achieve the result necessary to do the work and do it correctly, not in wasting your Saturday playing softball with the same people that you see all week. Just my $.02...

  • I am still here and just last week three of my friends bands played in dirty basement, with a lot of beer. Not much has changed. :) I am still enjoying it too.
  • I feel like I'm responding to a troll, but just in case:

    ... don't forget when you get a job
    at a company, you are there for the
    benefit of the company, not just your
    own personal gain.

    That's the company's take. Even from an Econ 101 point of view, the presumption is that each party is engaged in an "arm's length transaction", that they are there for their personal benefit.

    Why should I participate in company activities if I'm not being paid? The only reason I tolerate the presence of the type of person who runs the modern corporate business is because I need the money. Why would I hang out with them for free?

    Let me put it another way. Why would I do something that harms me, something that benefits only my employer (presuming they can find the camaraderie they're looking for), for nothing?

    As for being disconnected, the corporations involved create this state of mind. They hold meetings where they blather on about corporate vision and other quasi-religious nonsense but don't inform workers of price changes!

    After a while it's impossible to take them seriously; you're consumed with the desire to get away from them, as if they were one of those people who won't shut up about his favorite hobby / conspiracy / alien abduction. It's entertaining for about 30 seconds, but by 45, you're looking for escape routes.

    Ellen
  • Amen, brother.

    This guy would probably peg me as an "Isolate", but I'm probably more connected than he'll ever be. No, I couldn't give a damn 'bout my cow orkers except inasmuch they're good people to work with and we can produce a quality product at a good price and support it well. (They are, we do, and we do, respectively. It's a great place to be.)

    But my community is more than just my cow orkers, it's also /., a few geek mailing lists I hang out on, and so on.

    Schmoozing at the picnic, playin' softball and droolin' over the company newsletter got nothin' to do with it. My IP connectvity gives me a "network" of friends that beats these artificial "but you have to play 'dance-on-the-fulcrum-to-show-teamwork' with Johnny from Marketing!" social games hands-down.

  • Believe me, I'm far from trolling here.

    Far be it from me to be disillusioned, but generally, aren't the people you work for and with supposed to be people you like? Or are you telling me that everywhere you've worked, the participants have been mindless cogs in a larger machine? I've had the experience that if you treat people like cogs, they act like them. Instead, if you try to create a bond there, then there's a human level to the interaction that might not normally be there.

    If you feel that strongly about not participating in company activities (outings, retreats, softball, etc) because you're not getting paid, then why bother staying past 40 hours a week, ever. Even if that means not getting work done. Perhaps it's because I've always worked for small companies (not a conscious choice, BTW).

    My point came from this: If you don't want to ever mix business with pleasure (i.e. forced company outings, sports, yada yada yada) quit your job. You can find a new one. But don't ruin it for those of us who enjoy playing with our companies.

  • When I posted, this was at the bottom in the quote field. I felt it appropriate: "QOTD: Talent does what it can, genius what it must. I do what I get paid to do. "


  • No, they don't plan to port to linux, but I got the beta working under the lastest CVS build of wine


  • What does the Namibian tribesman actually posess that would be of any value to a person engaged in something that is done in the modern world.

    Hmm... a good number of large pharmaceutical companies among others seem to think tribes like them have something worth spending millions of dollars to go looking for. And that's just one example.

  • Apathy is always bad.



    I would dispute that statement, but I cant be bothered.

  • So, we had to come up with a unique methodology to implement. And I bet you'll never guess what we used: bathroom breaks. We installed cameras in the ir-activation mechanisms on those automatic toilets the company had installed two years previously, and we cross-matched bathroom-goers with the company facebook. It turns out, so-called "corporate isolates" are more likely to take frequent bathroom breaks, where they can escape the banter of coworkers (and decrease productivity at the same time). Like I said, the range came out to about "40%-60%", and needless to say, management was not pleased.

    Apparently it never occured to you that there are as many legitimate reasons for frequent bathroom visits as there are for skipping company picnics. Think medical. Think caffiene. Those are just 2 examples.

    And perhaps it's just me, but I find I get MUCH more work done when I'm isolated in my cube, than when I'm trapped in a hall listening to the drivel of the company gossip mongers.

  • It begs the question. I don't know. It's one of those things, like the end to Total Recall.
    ---
  • I've never understood the desire to work for a company you _cannot_ believe in. It just does not compute. I suppose, I'm still a bit wet behind the ears in terms of work experience, but I wouldn't even consider working for a company that held beliefs different from my own. I don't think that the presence of a company softball team automatically makes it an indoctrination machine, that's not a fair generalization. I played softball for a company I worked with last year. It wasn't mandatory, hell, I was the only person from my particular branch of the company on the team, but I had a good time, and no where in that field was there any talk of work, or whose contracts were up, or which releases were going on. It was just _softball_. Sometimes a cigar *IS* just a cigar.

    Per your comments about company loyalty, etc. I'm afraid I don't have enough work experience to make good generalizations. I _can't_ say anything definitive, and that kinda sucks, because I'm enjoying this debate. If you're just going through the motions at work, you must ask yourself, why are you there? If you don't enjoy doing what you do, why do you do it? Just for that paycheck that lands magically in your hands each month (or biweekly)? No a company does not *have* to be loyal to its employees, but companies suffer when they do not. At least small ones. And those are the ones with the best softball teams :)

"I've finally learned what `upward compatible' means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes." -- Dennie van Tassel

Working...