A CYNICAL LOOK AT THE PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT FROM COMPUTERS. I posted here and here on the “productivity paradox” that statistics do not seem to show that the computer has had much effect on economic productivity.
This is a question and answer (which I have seen attributed to Reddit) that is related to the productivity paradox: Question. What change over the last 15 years would most surprise a time traveler from 1995? Answer. “I have a device that I can hold in my hand that will give me access to almost all human knowledge. I use it to look at pictures of kittens and to argue with strangers.”
I love the comment about kitten videos.
There are good arguments on both sides about what computers have done.
Research is SO much easier now than it was “in the day.” However, as Phil
pointed out to me after we watched “London Wall,” a play written in 1931 and
set in a lawyer’s office, document production back then was slow, using both
the typewriter and manual labor. As a result, there was an economy of
paper, compared to how documents can now easily expand to thousands of pages, and then get printed up many times. This is not necessarily working in the interest of clarity, but becomes instead a chance to either hide something in a document or make the document so daunting, no one can bear to read it.
When we were first married, Phil suggested I might want to go to law school.
I replied, “I thought you loved me.” I had seen some of the work he brought
home and had to read with great attention, even though it was dry dry dry.
That’s the unglamorous part of being a lawyer, plowing through very lifeless writing and forcing your mind to stay awake.