If you like funny computer related stories; I’ve got another one (my first story can be found under Pepper’s entry for this week).
I’m sure most of you are familiar with the, “I think I broke by coffee holder” story (if not, just push the open button on your CD-ROM drive and imagine the possibilities). But have you heard the, “My Printer’s Dead” story. If not, following the advice of Janet Carey Eldred, here is a wonderful story any IT person can relate to:

So there I was, sitting in my little office installing updates on a machine when a very angry literature professor, who is a well respected scholar in a particular field, bursts in and declares, “My @$%#’n printer is broke again. You people really need to get your $%#$ together and fix that @#$%’n thing so I can work.”
Looking a little surprised, I said, “What seems to be the problem with the printer?”
“I keep trying to print and all it does is blink,” was the reply.
“Ok,” I said, “I will head to your office as soon as this update is finished.”
“Well I would hope so,” the professor grunted and stormed out of the office mumbling additional profanities.
So I finished the update and then walk down to the professor’s office.
Sure enough, the printer light was blinking.
I first checked the cables and then verified that the computer recognized the printer, which was obviously not the problem because that would not be very funny.
So I checked the printer to see if it had ink, which it did, and checked to see if it had a paper jam, which it did not.
But, I did notice one thing wrong with the printer.
The Printer was missing one essential component necessary to complete any print job, PAPER. That’s right; the open desktop printer tray was empty.
So I put some paper in the machine, hit the button next to the aggravated blinking light and pages slowly started pouring out of the machine.
After the third copy of the same document was printed, I decided to check the printer toolbox and discovered where the professor’s real frustration was emanating from. There were 50 copies of the same document waiting in the query to be printed.
So after canceling the remaining print jobs and shaking my head a bit, I set a clean copy of the document on the desk, locked the professor’s office, and called it a day. It’s was so much fun being a janitor when I was hired to build websites.

I had almost forgotten the “My Printer’s Dead!” story and had not thought about it for some time. But, then I read the following comment by Richard Miller:

So, all over campus one finds those who want to use the technology, but can’t; those who don’t want to use the technology, but feel they are being forced to; and plenty of people who wonder why all these funds are being poured into the ground, when the buildings above ground are falling down. (25)

The reason Miller’s comment and his video about Rutgers that we watched in class brought the story back into my mind revolves around the idea of people being forced to integrate technology into the work they do. As many of the articles that we have read to this point in the semester have pointed out, technology seems to be permeating into everything we, as academics, do. But, is the influx of technology, and the reliance we seem to have on computers, a benefit to all of our colleagues or does the same technology we praise become a hindrance to some?

If you will allow me to digress for just a moment, I think I would like to share another story. Although not a funny story, I think it pertains very well to the topics we have been discussing in the class so far and relates back to the issue of “technological fear.” The main character of this story is my own mother. Now my mother always thought that she and her children should be aware of, or at least exposed to, some of the new technologies that have developed over the last 25 years. However, once computers stopped requiring floppy disks to boot programs, she turned her back on technology and has not even touched my parents’ computer in about three years. For my mother, something happened when computer technology evolved to the point where manual manipulation of software was no longer required. It was as if the invention of the menu prompt and the wheely-ball mouse shifted the technology past what she was accustomed to and felt comfortable with. In other words, once the computer became less like a tape-recorded or a VCR it was no longer accessible. My mother did, however, eventually learn how to manipulate desktop icons and as long as she could see where she wanted to go without having to look she was fine. She would open up the word processor, type out a document for her first-grade students, and then print out multiple copies on the copy machine. So in a sense, for my mother the computer became an elaborate ditto machine (for those of you unfamiliar with a ditto machine, think back to the old crank handle copiers, one of which still sits in my parents’ basement like a demoted baseball player waiting to be brought back to the major leagues).

So why did I mention my mothers frustration with technology or the story about the “broken” printer that need paper. The reason I bring up both examples relates back to Millers statement about being people feeling “forced” to use new technologies. This concept of “forced to” is equivalent to the idea of “technological violence,” for some historical examples see Sam’s article. Regardless of whether we wish to admit it or not, the permeation of technology into “standardized” mainstream life, like the example we talked about in class regarding computer based applications at retail stores, carries with it a political and violent message. In some ways, the situation seems to suggest “Adapt or get left behind,” which in some cases leads to new a form of segregation within our society or a new form of prejudice toward the computer illiterate.

I am a self proclaimed techie dork, who loves the idea of using computers and sees the advantages new technologies have. But, I also have to step back every once in a while and wonder how much what I love is hurting some of the same people I am trying to help through my teaching practices. I have to question sometimes whether my zeal to help others at least be able to fill out an online application is actually feeding the machine of “technological violence” or if it is actually helping them? Is it right to “force” people like my mother to “adapt or get left behind” or am I actually committing an act of violence and forcing someone to do something against their will? Is there a happy medium? Is their a way to create balance where those who do not wish to have certain technologies become part of their life continue to keep it at a distance?