This is a text automatically translated from Italian. If you appreciate our work and if you like reading it in your language, consider a donation to allow us to continue doing it and improving it.
The articles of Cassandra Crossing I'm under license CC BY-SA 4.0
Cassandra Crossing is a column created by Marco Calamari with the “nom de plume” of Cassandra, born in 2005.
Every Thursday, starting from September 9th, we will offer you an ancient prophecy of Cassandra, to be reread today to reflect on the future, alternating recent articles selected from the latest releases.
Today a vintage Cassandra, we bring out an article of ben 14 years ago. Even in this case, however, in our opinion, Cassandra's eye always sees us very far away: “Do I need a latch for a door? Put a robot with a big foot in it“.
This article was written on March 9, 2007 from Cassandra
The unbearable unreliability of the bit
Even the simplest tasks are entrusted to platforms of enormous complexity. With all the consequences of the case. Eyes open: bits surround us.
Information technology is in decline.
Well, let's say it has become decadent.
At least let me know that it is used in a decadent way. Why? A few days ago I found myself in a very high profile company, with essentially unlimited means, attending a very important meeting.
Marble hall, 42-inch monitor next to the door just to show the meeting programme, projection from laptop onto giant screen.
At the coffee break I go outside and see two people staring at the monitor; there is no longer the meeting program, but the desktop of a popular operating system with a warning window announcing the installation of an important patch for the new summer time decided by the United States Congress.
The fact that the computer was doing something at that moment was obviously not important. Brooding and amused, I sip a coffee and return to the room. The meeting resumes and the speaker starts a (really good) 20-minute film from his laptop and sits down to talk with some colleagues.
10 minutes pass and suddenly the screen goes black and a small window of the usual widespread operating system announces that the computer is in use and has been blocked due to inactivity (but it was really doing something...).
The speaker sprints like a panther, touches the keyboard and is presented with the inevitable password request. Tense moment, but luckily he remembers it and the film quickly resumes, even if we missed some scenes (and certainly also any atmosphere).
Brooding but no longer very amused, I distracted myself and developed some considerations which I will explain to you below.
They are banal and obvious facts of no importance, one might say. It is notoriously the fault of the widespread operating system mentioned above, it will be said. In my opinion no. The problem is not more or less broken operating systems.
It cannot even be said that these are unimportant or isolated symptoms. How many times at the station, on the bus or on a thousand other occasions have we found ourselves faced with the fact that behind that very simple thing there was a computer that had gone haywire?
I remember at Rome Termini station seeing the monitors (beautiful 32 inch LCDs) announcing the areas of the next train that would stop at the platform; they had to display ONE SINGLE LETTER and were operated by a networked PC that had crashed showing the usual desktop of the usual widespread operating system
The problem is using complex systems to do simple things, just because complex systems cost little anyway.
One of my favorite science fiction authors wrote a dialogue in which a character complains that there are too many robots around and that people will soon be displaced by them: “Do I need a latch for a door? Put a robot with a big foot in there!”
Do you know those beautiful super-technological mobile phones? They are so full of features that there isn't even room in the manuals to list them.
Last month Sofia, my 4 year old granddaughter played with it for a few seconds. The next phone call almost cost me a heart attack when, instead of ringing, the cell phone brought out a baritone voice and announced the name of the person calling, also spelling it in English. Then he obviously stopped as soon as I tried to answer.
For me, it would be enough to be able to call us and, since I am a tech addict, also connect to wireless networks; Is it possible that after long studies the evil contraption is still capable of taking me by surprise?
For what it's worth, my conclusion is that we cannot yet afford to scatter complexity into everyday objects and situations.
The software is still created and tested with inadequate methods, the systems and networks are difficult to configure and would require complex and expensive maintenance which is almost never carried out.
In these conditions you cannot put a computer with an entire operating system, word processing and Browsers Internet to light an “A” on a 32-inch screen.
Sooner or later the system will fail to provide the simple function precisely because it is too complex and therefore has a much higher failure rate than the simple system would suffice.
Perhaps, while waiting to be able to create truly reliable software, computers and networks, simple, even if more expensive, ad hoc systems should be created and used. In the meantime, pay attention to the bits that surround you; instead of helping you they might bite you.
The day after tomorrow I have to take a renovated Eurostar, and I hope I don't have to spend 2 hours and 40 minutes in front of a computer screen that resets every 45 seconds.
It's happened to me before.
Marco Calamari
Video column “A chat with Cassandra”
Cassandra's Slog (Static Blog).
Cassandra's archive: school, training and thought
Join communities
If you have found errors in the article you can report them by clicking here, Thank you!