Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:46:49 -0400
From: "H. Curtiss Leung" <hleung-AT-prolifics.com>
Subject: Re: K. in hell


Scott writes:

>I found this in a discussion of object-oriented programming using the
>Perl language. You may provide your own commentary...
>
>"One big advantage of encapsulation is that it makes using information
>for unintended purposes more difficult, and this reduces logic errors.
>For example, if pens were sold in lots of 100, the
>changeQuantityOnHand() function would reflect this. Changing the
>quantity by only one would not be possible. This enforcement of business
>rules is one of the biggest attractions of object-oriented programming."
>-- 

        A few comments:

        Current techno-boosterism aside (e.g., WIRED magazine, Negroponte's
book _Being Digital_), business information systems have always been meant
to serve the needs of business.  Neither technology nor the "space" created
by the Internet will in themselves meet people's needs or increase their 
autonomy so long as this is true, and you don't need to read Adorno to
figure that out.  

        But if statement on encapsulation in Perl peels away one layer of
ideology, it only reveals another.  Let's call "Cyber-optimism" the ideology
that foists computing on the general public.  A post to the recent thread on
the division of labor noted that information work has also become 
proletarianized, but this isn't generally acknowledged; in the case of
computing workers (and here I mean programmers, sysadmins, network operation
techs, et cetera), the ideology that hides their status as workers identifies
them as equivalent to management, and management as equivalent to ownership.
As alienated labor goes, there's no denying computing is well paid and
safe compared to other jobs, but the fact remains that programmers, sysadmins,
et cetera, are always at the bottom of the org charts and that every aspect
of their production that can be determined by the needs of the business
will be.  So the notion that an Object-oriented programming language can
help meet business needs is attractive to programmers only if they view
their needs as coinciding with those business needs; otherwise, it just looks
like an invitation to be exploited.

        The situation becomes more interesting if you consider a bit of
history.  I've worked as a programmer for 10+ years, and have always seen
new technologies, products, and engineering paradigms advanced under the
aegis of meeting and enforcing business requirements.  That so many of 
these have fallen by the wayside while so many mission critical systems
use legacy technology only shows the notion that new technologies arise
to support business needs is also ideological: it serves the needs of
the community of computing goods and services vendors.

        So nobody's needs are met, while capitalism and the division of labor
are reproduced, and confusion reigns supreme.  The cyber-optimists call this 
freedom?  "The history of the oppressed teaches us that the current state of
emergency is not the exception but the rule."  Ain't it the truth.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Curtiss Leung                              (212)267-7722 Voice
hleung-AT-prolifics.com                       (212)608-6753 Fax
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Futility is...hard to deal with" -- Patrick Bateman
-----------------------------------------------------------------