Bob at BRADLEE.ORG
Thu Oct 13 20:01:20 CDT 2005
Comments inline ....
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:31:38 -0600, woodelf wrote:
>Brad Parker wrote:
>>They were anti-loosing-your-job-due-to-technology. They didn't think it
>>was right that 10 people working should become 3 people working just
>>because a new machine was installed...
> I can't think of were computers really had the most inpact
>other than word-processing and accounting. I think it was more
>the USA was not as inovative in small things but only large scale
Manufacturing, one well written numerical control program generator
can replace a small army of machinists with a small number of material
movers and machine loaders. Lathe, Mill, and grinder operators went first....
And how about the typesetters and linotype operators in the printing industry ?
There are many many more examples if you think about how things were done
before ... Digital
>>(and, I think they had a point. I think economists are all smoking
>>really good dope when they talk about mythical 'productivity gains')
The productivity gains are real in most manufactureing and process control applications.
Bean counting and people tracking is only a small part of the computing picture.
>productivity gains = more $$ for management from my view point.
more likely = more money for the vendors then what is left over is for the stock holders :)
More information about the cctalk