PC迷幻纪事：迷幻药、摇滚乐，以及个人计算机崛起的真实故事
基本信息编辑本段回目录
理想与冲突不断的六○年代直接促成了个人计算机工业的发展，当时盛行的反文化运动，如摇滚乐、乌兹塔克音乐节、嬉皮文化、反战运动或民权运动，对于愤怒青年们总有股无法克制的致命吸引力。那是个不羁的年代，更是愤青们吸取精神养分的来源，也是《PC迷幻纪事》一书的根源。作者将六○年代的时代精神与当今计算机、网络的共享宗旨相提并论，追溯发展计算机的小社群在六○年代发生的故事。阅读本书除可以了解个人计算机的起源外，更可同时进行一场六○年代的时光之旅。
What the Dormouse Said《PC迷幻纪事——从六○年代反动文化到个人计算机的诞生》
作者：John Markoff
译者：查修杰
出版社：大块文化
出版日期：2006 年 07 月 05 日
语言别：繁体中文
What the Dormouse Said: How the 60s Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer (Hardcover)
by John Markoff (Author) "
Hardcover: 336 pages
Publisher: Viking Adult (April 25, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0670033820
ISBN-13: 978-0670033829
内容简介编辑本段回目录
盖茨与创业员工现今硅谷呼风唤雨的大人物们，并没有忘记个人计算机和六○年代反主流文化间的连系。以苹果计算机创办人史提夫·乔布斯为例，他始终相信尝试迷幻药是他生命中最重要的两三项经历之一。这是一个新颖的观点──六○年代的反文化运动直接促成了个人计算机产业的发展。那是一个充满理想主义色彩的时代，美国西海岸活跃着一群寻求技术上的飞跃，从而使人类通往一个全新世界的科学家。
个人计算机之所以诞生在那个年代，绝非巧合。就在反越战声浪、争民权运动，和迷幻药实验风潮的最高峰，个人计算机也在几个产官赞助的研究团队，以及迫不及待想要实现个人驾驭计算机梦想的业余玩家手中诞生了。这些计算机先锋各自以不同方式，营造了个人计算机问世的氛围和基础，而个人计算机则在过去三十年创造了信息经济。如今，信息产业的存在等于是见证了这些人部份理想的实现。
那是一个不羁的年代：一个充满示威抗议、迷幻药实验、反传统社群，和无政府理想主义的时代。一九六○末，美国政治社会经历大幅动荡起伏，撕裂了五○年代的中产阶级安逸表象。从民权运动、迷幻药、女权问题、生态意识，到反战运动，都促成抗拒美国战后正统价值的反主流文化（counterculture）形成。今日我们司空惯见的计算机技术，其原始概念即成形于此一不羁年代，一个充满示威抗议、迷幻药实验、反传统社群，和无政府理想主义的时代。
这本书就是要回溯这不到二十年的时间里，区区几平方英哩的范围内发生的政治、文化，与科技潮流交会激荡。思想的冲击，催生出一个不平凡的概念：个人计算机，也就是一人完全掌控一台计算机，并藉由计算机拓展与传达思维的创见。在一九六○年代晚期，这样的概念已开始在旧金山半岛中部隐然浮现。
布兰德六○年代的美国。那是一个充满反战宣言和示威活动的时代，那也是一个反文化的时代——一个自由的，而且勇于自发去尝试新的事物，拥护新的主张的时代。也因此作者认为六○年代的反文化运动，直接促成了个人计算机工业的发展，这是相当新颖的观点。无论如何，当时的个人计算机事业充满理想主义色彩，美国西海岸活跃着一个寻求技术上的飞跃从而使人类真正通往一个新的世界的科学家团体。透过讲述个人计算机业发展的故事，作者告诉读者：美国人现在信奉的许多文化观点和信念，就是在那喧嚣的十年中发展形成的。
科幻小说作家威廉·吉布森（William Gibson）曾说：「未来已然降临，只是还未普及。」此一观察正可贴切描述本书中的小社群，它就像十五世纪意大利佛罗伦萨一样，地处边陲一隅，却在五百年前开创文艺复兴运动，憾动全世界。
作者马科夫是一个说故事的行家，全书立基于大量专访与口述资料。他将所有故事巧妙编织起来，展示了单独事件之间微妙而关键的线索，铺陈出整个历史脉络。书中的精彩情节非仅有关技术，还包括他们的生活点滴及个人遭遇──他们试过的迷幻药、性体验、摇滚乐，以及他们走过的游行场子。
作者简介编辑本段回目录
John Markoff（约翰·马可夫） 曾为《时代》（Times）杂志撰写计算机科技文章，现为《纽约时报》（New York Times）资深记者。着有畅销书《计算机朋克》(Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier)、《小心黑客》(Takedown)等。硅谷的文化观察家保罗·沙弗(Paul Saffo)这么形容他：「马可夫属于非常特殊的信息专业人(infonaut)。他有学界的好奇心和执着，但更难能可贵的是，他也有与现实非常接轨的一面，例如他是为《纽约时报》，而不是什么艰涩的专业杂志写文章。马可夫最重要的地方在于他不只是报导独家消息，而总是报导独家幕后的独家。他告诉我们早已发生而我们一无所知的情事，接着他又在更大的脉络底下往下深究一层。」
图书简评编辑本段回目录
What the Dormouse Said: How the 60s Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer
John MarkoffMost histories of the personal computer industry focus on technology or business. John Markoff’s landmark book is about the culture and consciousness behind the first PCs—the culture being counter– and the consciousness expanded, sometimes chemically. It’s a brilliant evocation of Stanford, California, in the 1960s and ’70s, where a group of visionaries set out to turn computers into a means for freeing minds and information. In these pages one encounters Ken Kesey and the phone hacker Cap’n Crunch, est and LSD, The Whole Earth Catalog and the Homebrew Computer Lab. What the Dormouse Said is a poignant, funny, and inspiring book by one of the smartest technology writers around.
What the Dormouse Said: How the 60s Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer Reviews
I highly recommend this book. THEY WERE ALL ON ACID. This book does for personal computing what "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" did for the Manhattan project. Yet they put that new-found insight to tremendous use. I found the stories in this book both entertaining and enlightening. Literally. It delves into the personalities, social climate and technological breakthroughs that added up to the personal computer industry as we know it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It tries to show how the technology, culture, and politics of the 1960s converged to create the personal computer revolution. The personal computer. I think this book is well worth reading. The first is that the author was unsuccessful in supporting his thesis that the use of psychedelic drugs, particularly LSD, was a significant factor in the development of computer technology and the philosophy of putting computers into the hands of individuals. I felt like I was only given a small taste of what the book was really supposed to be about. It is fascinating to see how so much of the technology used in today's individual and networked computing was developed 30 to 40 years ago based on Doug Engelbart's vision of the computer as tool for augmenting human intelligence. And it attempts to go further. Also, the book really only got to its point - the impact on the personal computer industry - in the last 20 pages.
Author John Markoff provides an interesting glimpse of some of the more interesting characters that transformed computing technology from a number crunching function dominated by corporate stuffed shirts and military contractors to an anarchic society dedicated to sharing ideas and programs. The fact that LSD and other drugs were used by many computer engineers of the time is established, but no evidence is presented that this was a causative factor in any subsequent developments in the computer industry. It will be of interest to today's technophiles who have an interest in history, as well as to non-technical readers interested in understanding the role of computers in today's rapidly changing society. Whether operated in standalone or networked fashion, nothing in the last two decades has changed our lives more. This doesn't take anything away, however, from the rest of the book, which provided some very interesting history. Computers have so strongly impacted our lives so quickly that we haven't had the chance to step back and understand the history behind them. Whether you're at home surfing the Internet, editing a spreadsheet at work, or just wishing you had nice laptop like the guy next to you at Panera, you're affected by the personal computer.
I did have a couple of issues with this book. It also shows how the personalities and political leanings of the players in the early computer industry set the stage for today's issues: Should software be the property of the developer to be bought and sold, or freely distributed. How should computer technology affect how music and movies are distributed. The seeds for these current issues were sown 30 or more years ago, and Markoff does an excellent job of providing the background information necessary to make sense of them. "What the Dormouse Said: How the 60s Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer Industry" provides that history.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No such evidence exists, in spite of the author's efforts at implication. My question would be how much is that Markoff and how much stems from the marketing department of the publisher. I agree with the last two reviews, even though the reviews' authors do not take the same position. However, that sort of mental activity was way beyond my meager comprehension. To paraphrase, "I coulda been a contenda." The basic historical narrative comes through on its own quite well.
I also agree with Jerry that the counterculture/drugs, sex, LSD stuff is overdone.
However, it is very easy to ignore the distractions when the narrative wanders into psychedelia.
As someone who knows nothing about the origins of the personal computer, I found the Markoff history to be utterly fascinating.
A reviewer, the late Guy Davenport, chalked up Fox-Weber's effort to a simple attempt to capitalize on the subject of pedophilia in an effort to sell his book.
Similarly, Markoff or his publisher may be guilty of the same thing.
I attended MIT briefly in 1954-55, and there were Norbert Weiner and Lincoln Lab, right there.
Obviously, as Jerry says, stuff was going on all over the country, not just in Palo Alto and environs.
I am glad that someone like "Gnetworker" can vouch for the authenticity of the history.
In a similarbut not relatedvein, a biography of the painter Balthus by Nicholas Fox-Weber appeared some years ago in which the author expended a lot of effort intimating Balthus was a pedophile.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An ear for language delights, in my view, in these ranges and groups of words]. It is an instance of what C. This is how Markoff seems to feel when he narrates "mere coding" as consistently farmed out. While the counter culture did indeed shape the personal computer revolution world wide, and while someone needed to narrate the story before the early 1970s, and Markoff does this, this book narrates the story in a white, male, narcissistic fashion in which the center of the world is San Francisco.
This was the New Yorker artist who in the 1980s issued a number of popular posters which positively celebrated the Reagan era's dawn of narrowed focus, because for various hip locales, the artist drew the features of that locale completely out of scale. In the 2001 ACM paper in which Alan Kay heroically celebrated Doug Engelbart's contribution, Kay celebrates programming, not the vision "thing". In fine, this is a book whose framework is dishonest in a USA and a world in which productive forces merged at many different places, not only in the Bay Area. The hardware copped the realization that since mainframes by 1970 had already evolved into circuits that were less machines than almost pure information, there was no lower bound to their size. Thus Markoff fails to reflect that in the Bay Area, drugs and computers both represented a commodification of existence in which people properly esconced within taxpayer supported institutions need no longer manifest any personal responsibility to the taxpayer and their government, conveniently alienated from them by the Vietnam war.
This meant programming, not drug-taking or navel-gazing. What the dormouse said was in fact to empower yourself, and only yourself, by creating or preferably swiping a range of new commodities which only differentiated the wealth gap. French Canadian war workers assembling weapons under the supervision of one of Markoff's heroes are dismissed in a phrase "French-Canadian peasants". S. This is because "peasant" is part of an n-tuple, a range, consisting of farmer, peasant, serf and slave, and in this n-tuple the peasant is bound by custom, and the lack of a cash economy (to which Canucks had access to in 1941), to the land. There was little all that world-historical about this sordid business. The style jars, disturbs: but the issue is not only a false note beneath the standards of the Times for whom Markoff works, it is also that people in North America, outside black and white sharecroppers before the War on Poverty of the 1960s in the American south, cannot be properly described as "peasants".
It is true as Markoff relates that the drug culture interacted with computing in the 1960s and 1970s.in the Bay Area and elsewhere. Nonetheless, Markoff makes a big fat joke out of Wirth, a joke worthy of the students tormenting Dr Rath in Der Blaue Engel, when Wirth insists, in his narrative, on two extra keys (control and alt) for a new keyboard. I began to realize its low journalistic standards when, in writing of GUI pioneer Doug Engelbart, Markoff carelessly has him, in 1950, thinking about joining the "Peace Corps". This is just sloppy journalism: the book can't be written off as pop history and thus journalism if the journalism itself is of low standard. It dawned on me that Markoff writes unthinkingly in a "Saul Steinberg" style. Niklaus Wirth is the unjustly uncelebrated inventor of Pascal, Modula and Oberon, objectively quite a track record as compared to the one-to-one correspondence of American computing luminaries with languages they have authored.
Basically, you don't get into the ethnocentric playbook without the proper background. In Saul Steinberg logic, a certain number of rings in a torus constitute an evaluative, almost a moral scale, which permits Markoff to be lazy when his descriptions range outside a Stanford and New York City access. It gets worse. But after the Judy Miller scandal, in which a New York Times reporter who had enthusiastically and with insufficient research beat the drums for war in 2003 was briefly jailed *pour encourager* at Markoff's paper, it's clear that Job One at the Times is maintaining strict ideological boundaries. There are few women in this book apart from the redoubtable Pam Hart and no people representative of the Earth's majority, and the reason is that even in the 1960s, the technical elite was in search of a way to dialectically reassert its Power and Control as against Betty Friedan and Fanon. There was little place for these people in the Bay Area, where seekers generally had Ivy League credentials enabling them to support their search more or less conveniently. Had Wirth been an American, of course, he would be celebrated as the "inventor" of these keys which are in use today, which make keyboards usable, and without which today's international computing wouldn't have been possible.
They found it and as a result what IS a tool of liberation IS ALSO a tool of enslavement and Western domination. Lewis, writing about the Renaissance of the 16th century called "new learning and new ignorance", in which the ethnocentric narrative is destroying the real history. The problem here is that Ted Nelson (who is mentioned, although his trashing by the staff of Wired magazine in 1998 is not) meant it when in Computer Lib he said "you can and must understand computers". The software was an application of the discovery in Europe and not the USA that software written (in the Fortran style) as lists of instructions without a modular structure seldom worked no matter how large and impersonal, or small and cuddly, the machine happened to be. [The farmer participates in the cash economy: the serf is unlike the peasant bound by law: the slave is chattel and the zero point of my series, if you must know. Bill Gates is the implicit villain of the piece with his 1976 letter to hobbyists but I am afraid that billg had a point, and as a result of his efforts, people with degrees from crummy state and junior colleges get above all paid for their efforts, and perform at and beyond the limit of their capabilities. And, when Markoff quotes John Doerr on this being the biggest legal transfer of wealth in history, he fails to mention that as a result, according to the CIA world factbook, 80% of Americans have lost ground while 20% have done well out of scale to their contribution to a society.which lacks health insurance, whose education system in New York City has been adjudged unconstitutionally bad under the constitution of New York, and which could not manage the New Orleans disaster.
It gets even worse. Drugs and software in fact represented something one could "cop" while poor saps in Chicago coded Cobol and paid taxes that supported the development of the valuable software artifacts. Furthermore, Wirth, like his mentor and friend Edsger Dijkstra (who is unmentioned in the book as a critic of drug-addled development) were in the Californian-Markoff scheme of things speed bumps in the way of a reified and commodified Progress because both had the bad grace to think critically about software, and neither thought that Great Men should never code actual software unless their Greatness be deconstructed. I am certain that Harry Truman had no such operation, and, of course, the Peace Corps was founded ten years later by President Kennedy. The visions in the hot tub had already been when I was a kid a Sunday supplement gee-whiz feature. Today, more than thirty years after Alan Kay's dynabook, we apparently still think that the MIT laptop, as a commodity and as only a commodity, is the Answer, and that simple compassion for others, as opposed to psychodrama, might not be the Answer.
书评编辑本段回目录
PC 迷幻纪事
《PC迷幻纪事》
[阅读]
很多人都知道摇滚乐的历史有大半建立在药物上，很少人关心计算机网络科技的早期阶段也掺了不少药味，《PC 迷幻纪事》写的就是那五六十年代前个人计算机时代的迷幻历史，讲说那批早期的计算机工程师谁谁谁碰过LSD、幻菇、大麻，或参加过某次反对运动之类的。
我猜想这本书在台湾一定卖得不太好，关心药物文化的人比较多是听摇滚乐那挂，这类人一翻开书前几页，读到「磁蕊内存」、「三极真空管」、「固态电路」、「PDP－10」、「NLS系统」、「ARPA」...等等名词，大概会毫不犹豫地把书丢回书架；明白这些名词是怎么回事的人，十之八九也不会对药物文化感兴趣。
更糟的是，这本书野心太大，人物太多，想说的故事太杂，噜哩噜嗦。全书都是这样的叙事：「A从小就是如何如何的人，后来遇到B，他们一起进了C机构，共同开发了机器D。后来E看到机器D，也进了C机构，但后来跑到F机构，拉G和H进来。其中，G从小就是如何如何的人，后来遇到H，他们一起进了I机构，共同开发了系统 J...」，一页里起码会出现七八个新人物（括号原文）和新名词（括号原文），复杂得令人叹为观止，读了后面就忘了前面。
无论如何，这本书的主旨还是十分有趣：科技与反文化乍看不相干，但实际上，许多怀抱远大梦想的科技人，都曾经过反文化的洗礼和启发。
其实，如果不谈到前个人计算机时代那么久远，现今网络文化里的Cyberpunk这一个脉络也有些药物的成份。像90年代发刊的 Mondo 2000杂志就常大谈迷幻经验和「聪明药（smart drugs)」。搞 Mondo 2000的那些人，一批成立了 Wired 杂志，另一批成立了 Boing Boing网站，二者都是当今网络文化媒体的代表。如果这条脉络也能写能书，精采程度应该不输《PC迷幻纪事》。
从嬉皮到芯片的革命编辑本段回目录
1985年，因特网的一个前身在旧金山诞生。创立者有两位，一位是特立独行的公共卫生医师拉里·布里连特，目前执掌谷歌基金会；另一位是记者兼企业家斯图尔特·布兰德：此人很有一套，文化和技术领域的变革总有他的身影。
他们创建了“WeU”网络，想把这个电子网络系统发展成一个“虚拟社区”，类似于加利福尼亚北部、科罗拉多、新墨西哥的山峦里建立的那种公社组织。“Well”网络的成员可以用即时讯息讨论各种话题：从技术问题到“感恩之死”乐队。
不费什么力气就可以查出1985年创办的“Well”网站后来怎样了：它就是如今的Web 2．0。“MySpace”一类的社交网络和“YouTube”一类的用户生成内容网站都仿造了类似的虚拟社区。再往前推20年，你就能发现因特网还有另一个根源：20世纪60年代的反正统文化运动。
布兰德在1967年也是一个“推波助澜”的人物。他的创举是出版了《全球目录》，“Well”网络的名称就起源于此，是“全球目录电子连接”Whole Earth’Link)几个词的首字母组合。<全球目录>是一种类似西尔斯百货公司商品目录那样的检索书籍，主要面向嬉皮士，罗列的东西从帐篷到计算器应有尽有。
因特网有一种理想化的品质。谷歌的共同创立者把“不做恶”作为自己的非正式座右铭。维基百科全书——由网民志愿编撰的网络百科——一类的大胆尝试也是基于这样的信念：相比那些存在等级划分的机构的个人，志愿者结成的团体能做得一样好，或者更好。
20世纪60年代的公社组织如何催生了过去30年中的科技企业家，这个故事引入入胜。约翰·马尔科夫在他的《睡鼠怎么说：60年代反文化运动如何促成了个人电脑行业发展》(台湾译本书名为《PC迷幻纪事》——本报注)中已经讲述了故事的一个版本。斯坦福大学的学者弗雷德·特纳叙述了同一个故事，只不过更为详尽一些，而且还有把事物归纳成主观想法的趋势。
特纳关注的是个人电脑和因特网变革中出现的一个具有讽刺意味的事实。那便是：这场变革是战后在政府资助的军事研究中发展起来的。军工机构需要洛斯阿拉莫斯和橡树岭这样的跨学科实验室里酝酿出来的创新思路。这成了硅谷公司早期的创新模式。
上世纪60年代的变革者对大型机代表的企业的力量和压迫人的技术感到愤怒。他们走入山间，也就是想回归科技诞生之前的自然状态。随后，这一代人的子女在这条路上继续前进，发明了个人电脑，这些电脑又被苹果计算机公司的史蒂夫·乔布斯当作对抗乏味的整齐划一的武器销售。为了实现解放的目的，科技又被重新拾了起来。
背景阅读：书摘－PC迷幻纪事编辑本段回目录
文/iThome (记者) 2006-09-24
一九六三到一九六九年，被认为是人工智能研究的「黄金」时期，当时的人工智能领域大致分为两大阵营，一派相信可以人工方式仿真大脑神经功能，创造人工视觉与人工语言；另一派人士则认为有可能制作出比人脑更强的「超级大脑」...
PC迷幻纪事
What the Dormouse Said: How the 60s
Counterculture Shaped the Personal
Computer Industry
约翰‧马可夫（John Markoff）/着，
查修杰/译
大块文化出版
售价：280元
在全录与自制计算机玩家们投入以前，个人计算机的基础技术是由两个美国政府单位赞助的实验室在着手研发。这两所实验室位于史丹佛大学校区两端，都成立于六○年代，却抱持完全不同的研究理念：道格拉斯·恩格保（Douglas Engelbart）在史丹佛研究院（Stanford Research Institute，SRI）成立的人类智识增益研究中心（Augmented Human Intellect Research Center），是以开发强大的计算机设备来提升人类心智为出发点﹔相反地，约翰．麦卡席（John McCarthy）的史丹佛人工智能实验室（Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratories，SAIL），则是以仿真人类智识为目标。
前者设法拓展人类心智；后者则试图取代它。
增益理论成形
一九六一到一九六二年这段期间，是恩格保日后所谓「增益架构」理论成形的重要时期。但在研发之初，一切仍只限于指手划脚，看不见也摸不着。想实际做出东西，必须找到大笔研究经费。曾有一段时间恩格保以为新兴的人工智能领域可以成为赞助来源，或至少在某些方面尝试合作。但人工智能学者用他们的观点来解读恩格保的想法，增益理论在他们眼中平凡无趣，被贬低为单纯的资料存取技术，完全忽略了恩格保的本意。
他逐渐理解到，人工智能论者的最终目标，其实与增益理论是相互抵触的。他们的理想是以机器取代人脑，而恩格保的目标则是拓展人的潜能。他日后曾透露他并不反对人工智能技术，只不过在他看来这样的概念还需要很长很长的时间才能实现。
学术路途上，他一直面临想法不为人理解的困境，但恩格保坚持不放弃。一九六二年十月，他在一份提交给空军的结论报告「人类智识增益理论之概念架构」里，描绘了心中愿景。第二年，他把这篇报告精简为论文集《信息处理之未来》（Vistas in Information Handling）里头的一章。他的「架构」包含科技面和组织面，规划出如何让配备计算机的工作小组更有效率地解决问题。由此观之，增益理论已经涵盖了个人计算机和因特网。
为了让他人体会增益的好处，恩格保偶尔会运用反增益的技巧，这是他从国家航天咨询委员会的风洞工作经验中体会比例增缩概念时，所学到的思考方法。为了让人体会反增益的效果，他把砖头绑在笔上，请人拿它写字，再测量写字速度，然后与打字机和手写做比较。当然，结果是打字机速度最快，而沉重的笔写起字来则是既累又缓慢。
在他第一份概念较完整的论文里，恩格保以拥有计算机的建筑师为例。「想象一个获得「增益」的建筑师，正在工作，」他写道，「他坐在工作站前「工作站」一词二十五年后才在硅谷逐渐流行），一边放着和他距离约三英呎的显示屏幕。这就是他的工作平台，由一台计算机（他的「办事员」）控制，而他则运用一具小键盘和各式设备来与计算机沟通。」
接着，在描述解决问题的人与计算机「办事员」之间的全新关系之后，恩格保简短说明了他的完整构想：计算机不只是数字运算工具而已，他写道。计算机具备许多非运算层面的能力，包括规划、组织，和研究：「任何以符号概念思考的人，都将具体受惠于计算机之协助。」
在他平铺直叙的文字下，隐藏着对计算机技术前所未见的宏远规划。当时的计算机都是体积吓人的庞然大物，愈来处理大型组织业务，包括支票簿记和飞弹轨道等运算。道格‧恩格保意识到计算机具备数据处理以外的潜能。过去，每台计算机都有许多人照顾，如今，计算机将变身为个人助理。此概念直接沿袭自范尼瓦的记忆机，而全录研究员艾伦‧凯伊（Alan Kay）想象中功能强大、无线连结、轻便可携的Dynabook，则在十年后具体描绘了这样一部机器。它持续不断地提供许多硅谷产品的灵感来源，而其原始出处，正是道格‧恩格保提升人类心智的概念推演。
恩格保一九六二年的报告中，也描绘了一具能彻底改变研究工作的书写机器。此时他还未萌生以鼠标指针协助编辑的概念，不过他很明确地知道他理想中的计算机化设备，将为人们处理信息的方式带来剧变。
他在文中简短介绍了范尼瓦的记忆机，并以数页篇幅讨论「相关连结」的想法，这也是超文本以及三十年后全球信息网（World Wide Web）的前身。而在一段探讨相关研究、对日后影响深远的注记中，他提到了利克里德的想法。这两人曾在那年稍早一场技术会议中相遇。恩格保认为利克里德发明的「人机共生」（man-computer symbiosis）一词，明确传达了现代计算机的重要性。而两人的结识也证明攸关日后的技术发展。
在总结增益理论时，恩格保以一个叫乔伊的虚拟人物做说明。乔伊坐在一套庞大系统前方，面对两台显示器，和一个包含多组命令键的键盘。而用来移动指标和编辑的工具，则是一只悬吊在他前方的光笔。
乔伊工作时，大部分时间都是一手操作键盘组，另一手控制光笔。他不断移动着屏幕上各种符号。
乔伊是恩格保最早提出的人类增益系统范例，其中运用了部分他在菲律宾那间茅屋图书馆里获得的想法。这份增益理论初稿的出现，相较于第一部现代商用个人计算机全录奥图（Xerox Alto）的问世，刚好早了十年又多一点。创造个人计算机的功劳，结果多半落在全录研究小组身上，而非恩格保。然而打造奥图的全录设计人员都曾受到恩格保的概念影响。
人工智能的崛起
计算机科学家和数学家约翰‧麦卡席在一九六四年成立史丹佛人工智能实验室。早在他一九六二年来到史丹佛以前，麦卡席就已是计算机圈内声誉显赫的人物。他不但发明了高度弹性化的人工智能标准程序语言LISP，更首创奠定计算机互动模式的分时共享操作系统。
三十五岁的麦卡席，顶着「人工智能」一词发明者和前数学神童的光环，二度来到史丹佛大学（他曾在五零年代初短暂于此任教）。一九五六年夏天在达特茅斯大学（Dartmouth）教书时，曾协办第一场以计算机仿真人类智能为主题的研讨会，并在大会提案中首度提出「人工智能」一词。当时他正潜心撰写西洋棋下棋程序，且终其一生他都对人工智能的实现保持乐观态度。不过，在经历一厢情愿认定人工智能一蹴可及的五零与六零年代后，他也开始改采较为理性的态度，认为创造人工智能的前提，是须有「一点八个爱因斯坦，加上曼哈顿计划十分之一的资源。」
在鼓励科技创新的时代气氛下，一九六三到一九六九年，被认为是人工智能研究的「黄金」时期。从人工视觉、机器人装置、专家系统、合成语音，到语言理解等领域都有长足进步。当时的人工智能领域大致分为两大阵营，一派相信可以人工方式仿真大脑神经功能，创造人工视觉与人工语言。另一派人士则持不同意见，认为有可能制作出比人脑更强的「超级大脑」。
从一开始，麦卡席就相信人工智能应具备与使用者之间的互动，但他从未想过拥有一台自己的计算机。相反地，由于计算机速度进化，即使把程序资源切割为小单位，均分给不同使用者，使用者也不致有明显感受，而会有计算机是自己专用的错觉。由于计算机处理速度极快，加上在图形显示问世之前，多数人机互动均仅限于键盘文字输入与显示，因此计算机有大半时间其实都浪费在等待使用者的输入。事实上，在早期就有分时共享系统出现，由兰德公司（RAND）开发，取名乔斯（JOSS），但其运作方式是在每具终端机上装设灯泡──等灯泡亮起时，终端机才能使用计算机资源！
然而在一九五○年代末，麦卡席的概念已经超越当代，并与恩格保的增益理论异曲同工。不过两者间有其基本差异。就出发点来看，两派不同处在于人的主导地位。能模仿甚至超越人类的超级机器，并非恩格保的追求目标。这两个阵营间虽然不曾直接论战，但双方抱持的理念各异，分别代表了人性论者与机械论者，对计算机科技走向的不同信念。然而即使在看法上各持己见，在实质上他们却经由增益实验室与人工智能实验室，合力奠定了「个人计算机」概念基础，催生个人计算机问世。
当平价个人计算机终于在一九七○年代中期诞生，外界普遍视之为分时共享迷你计算机的竞争对手。但更关键的，其实是麦卡席对互动性的原始概念──一台在实质上可让使用者自主操作的计算机。麦卡席本人并未体认到恩格保的微芯片效能增缩趋势，但他的研究也涉及大幅提升个人工作效率，而虑及当时计算机成本高昂，分时共享系统确实是有效的作法。
黑客美学与人工智能的渊源
在SAIL发明现代音乐合成器关键技术的约翰‧琼宁，认为史丹佛人工智能实验室就像个「思想辩证园地」。SAIL具体实现了加州大学计算机专家与前SAIL系统设计师布莱恩‧哈维（Brian Harvey）所谓的「黑客美学」。哈维的观点，是在史提芬‧利瓦伊（Steven Levy）于《黑客：计算机革命英雄》（Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution）一书中提出「黑客守则」后成形的，后者将麻省理工学院计算机黑客的不成文规范形诸文字：
● 使用计算机──或任何有助理解事物原理的东西──的权利应属于所有人且无任何限制。「亲自操作」是最高指导原则。
● 所有信息均应开放取用。
● 反抗威权──权力下放。
● 评价黑客的唯一准则，是他的技巧高低，而非学位、辈分、种族、地位等虚假标签。
● 计算机可以让人创造艺术与美。
● 计算机可以改善人类生活。
但哈维却有不同的见解。先后在麻省理工学院与史丹佛人工智能实验室担任程序设计师的他以资深黑客身份提出反驳，认为计算机技术不是一种规范，而是一种美学。「黑客行为，从恶作剧到撰写高超的计算机程序皆属之，（如VisiCalc就是黑客杰作，同类模仿者则否）」他写道：「但无论那一种，皆须具备美感才是好的黑客行为。如果要开玩笑，就要开得彻底。若是你决定把某人房间翻过来，光把家具黏上天花板是不够的，还必须把桌上的纸也一张张黏上去。」
不过哈维不同意另一位知名麻省理工学院黑客，理查德‧史托曼（Richard Stallman）所提出的信息开放的说法。史托曼的想法并非出自财产公有概念──一种道德观──而是体认私藏信息终将拖累效率：「导致不符合美感的拷贝行为。」任何曾接触计算机社群，见证其成长演变的人，都不难看出两种观点各有其真实性。格调固然为众人所追求，但黑客行为本质仍潜藏一种道德观，发展至今更成为计算机领域里一股强大的力量。
1969年因特网诞生，与个人计算机发展息息相关
一九六九年三月，杜佛与杰夫．鲁利夫森飞到犹他州，代表增益实验室出席ARPA赞助的网络工作小组（Network Working Group）会议。第一阶段四个网络节点包括加州大学洛杉矶分校（UCLA）、史丹佛研究院、加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校和犹他大学。最后，这个计划在鲍布．泰勒引导下，扩大为一个可供各类型使用者进行信息分享与远程运算的单一网络。
在一九六九年三月的会议之后，加州大学洛杉矶分校学者史提夫．克拉克（Steve Crocker）提出了一份草拟文件，称作「一号意见征求表」（Request for Comments 1，RFC 1）。从此RFC便成为在因特网上简便发表技术标准的固有传统之一。第一份意见征求表根据开会结论写成，内容是有关四地主机计算机将如何透过中继数据处理器，也就是所谓的IMP进行通讯。而IMP的研发设计，将由剑桥市BBN公司负责。
RFC 1基本上，它就是现代因特网的创始文件。克拉克的意见征求表最后提出两项「实验」。第一项要求史丹佛研究院修改NLS软件，以便利用电传打字方式远程操作。二项实验野心更大，史丹佛研究院必须写出NLS完整版的「前端」程序，并整合图形显示。
今日以全新方式连结世界各地人们的计算机网络，其技术起源就埋藏在这份文件当中。道格．恩格保的NLS系统被定位为有史以来第一套「杀手级应用程序」。这个称号在十年后成为流行词汇，用来形容能促成计算机产业新成长的软件程序。
但在这一切成真之前，撰写远程登入以及档案传输程序的低阶工作，还是得有人做。克拉克发表一号意见征求表之后两天，杜佛提出RFC 2，规范联机的「初始检查」过程，以便确认洛杉矶分校与史丹佛研究院的计算机确实已经联机。整理⊙编辑部
参考文献编辑本段回目录
http://intermargins.net/intermargins/IsleMargin/DrugLib/books/book10.htm
http://www.amazon.com/What-Dormouse-Said-Counterculture-Personal/dp/0670033820
http://www.ithome.com.tw/itadm/article.php?c=39492
http://jeph.bluecircus.net/archives/reading/what_the_dormouse_said.php
http://www.chinesevacuum.com/ShowArticle.aspx?id=9203
