Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

I liked the read despite its predictable, unoriginal, oft-repeated decry of technology with respect to its (perceived) environmental burden. There are several replies by Berry's contemporaries which vocalize their disagreement with his position and his justification.

With the distance in time to this piece, I think the point to add to the discussion is that a key implicit assumption of Berry (and in fact even to his opponents) is false. The assumption that the default mode of civilization is prosperity for all. Same mistake we make till today on all levels of politics and education.

Poverty is the natural state of "cosmos", and perhaps an equivalent of physical entropy concept. In a closed system a dis-order increases until we are all equally poor (there is NO natural/social law/system in the cosmos where would guarantee all of us equally rich/valuable by default). At the same time full and complete poverty for all can never be reached because (some) life-agents itself will try to utilize energy within (social/environmental) system to create pockets of prosperity, naturally syphoning out energy from the rest of the system. I do not want to imply a political of economic system within a conceptual paragraph -- that would be overextending the idea. The point is in my view that Berry does not ask the right question, or assumes the wrong default.

I don't own a computer. I have a pocket tablet that shows me the newspaper (and makes phonecalls). I have a screen on my desk that plays old Nintendo games. I have a typewriter which I use to write computer code. But I have no interest in owning a computer.

> My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then.

This was written in the late 80s, but I'd guess they're still using that typewriter over 60 years after it's purchase. Not saying I completely agree with his whole essay, but there's not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era.

> But the cost would not be just mone- tary. It is well understood that technological innovation always requires the discarding of the "old model"

He's not wrong. Just try to go dig up an old laptop from ~20 years ago that you might have laying around somewhere. Yes, it might work (after you replace the battery), but can you transfer files to/from it now if it didn't have USB ports then? Or if it didn't have the current USB port that all your current devices use? Floppies were ubiquitous in the 90s, but try reading one now - it's not impossible, but you'll probably have to find some service to help you do that since it's not likely that you've had a floppy drive for close to 20 years.

As an example, I'd like to get an e-reader that would be usable in 20+ years. But that doesn't seem likely. The batteries aren't easy to change in most of these devices anymore and they'll likely fail long before that. Many of them use android and when support for your device is over... you could probably use it for a while, but eventually it's going to be difficult.

All that to say that Mr. Berry's choice doesn't seem all that crazy to me.

The original Computer Vegan, complaining about the coal used to power a computer while at the same time using a typewriter that is made of steel that had to be fired and forged probably using coal. I'm not saying he's wrong, but unless he mines his own metal and has a solar powered forge, he's fooling himself.

What is the reason for writing the code?