\s mYevtew ELECTRONIC ADDITION - University of British Columbia

OPINIONS AND NOTESwhere they might get a copy of the programdescribed. Would I be kind enoughto send them one? Did I know of acompany that distributed the program?To all my answer was a firm "No." Thissounds harsh, perhaps, but I was actingout of pedagogical instincts; they wouldlearn only by doing. They would do, ofcourse, only when they learned how easyit was to write the programs I was suggesting.But how to break out of thisvicious circle? As an experiment I wrotea special column in the April 1985 issueof Scientific American entitled "FiveEasy Pieces." The article featured fiveeasy programming projects. The first wasso easy that a person of average intelligencecould have written it within anhour or two of picking up a BASICmanual. The mail from that column hasso far totalled approximately 3000 pieces( all of which had to be answered ), morethan twice the amount produced by anycolumn before or since. The great majorityof letters concerned the first easypiece: I had asked readers to write aprogram that simulated the firing of acannon at random into a round pondoccupying the middle of a square field.After taking a thousand shots, they wereto count the number of splashes, so tospeak, and divide the sum by 250. Theresult would be an estimate of pi, thefamous transcendental number expressingthe ratio of a circle's circumference to itsdiameter.Naturally, the program was describednot only in these colourful terms but interms of the few commands that wouldbe needed actually to write it. I do notknow how many of the readers respondinghad just written their first programbut, judging from the almost patheticallypleased tone of their letters, I think agreat many of them must have.Sherry Turkle, in her book TheSecond Self, outlines the steps by whichchildren acquaint themselves with computers.The mystery of the machine isfollowed by mastery over it. In the process,the child's world view and selfimageare reflected in the computerthrough the manner of interaction withit. There are "hard masters" who revelin the sense of control over the machineand "soft masters" who are led to explorethe machine's potential by movingfrom one satisfying experience to thenext. Among adults one finds similartendencies. Historically, it was the hardmasters who set the personal computerrevolution in motion during the 1970'sby making computers out of kits andthen writing various systems programsthat expanded the capabilities of theirmachines. This school continues to dominatethe many computer magazines stillin print; one sees endless ads for newhardware, technical reviews, articles thatdescribe new ways to store files, communicatewith other computers, compileprograms, and so on. All of this representsa turning inward of the computerupon itself with seemingly no awarenessof the vast world of ideas open for exploration.An apt analogy involves theyouth of the 1950's who so enjoyed tinkeringwith his roadster that he nevertook it for a drive. Countless potentialsoft masters have been turned away fromtheir birthright by the casual perusal ofsuch magazines at the newstand. Frightening.Complex.This article is not only about personalprograms but soft masters. The world ofthe hard master is very limited comparedto the universe of ideas and issuesthat can be explored with a personalcomputer. For each model currently onthe market there are friendly, companionableprogramming manuals (often notthe ones supplied by the manufacturer)that offer instruction and advice on avariety of levels. Unfortunately, thereseem to be very few books that supplyworthy projects for future soft masters.201