Skip to main content

Tom Lean - Four Way Interview

Tom Lean is a historian of science and technology.  He has a PhD on the history of computing and a particular interest in old technologies and the people who made and used them.  In his day job he records scientists and engineers life stories for an oral history archive project at the British Library, helping to preserve the memories of scientists' pasts for future generations. His new book is Electronic Dreams – How 1980's Britain Learned to Love the Home Computer.


Why Science? 

It's really more the history of science and technology for me, and particularly their interaction with the world at large. I enjoy the puzzle aspect of complex systems involving technologies, science, people, organisations, ideas and more, and seeing how all the parts fit together and interact. I'm interested in how science and technology develop over time and the way that society, the things that we think and do, helps to shape those developments. 

Why this book? 

I've been fascinated by 1980s home computing for years; I even did a PhD on it. The home computer boom was the moment of first contact between millions of people and computers, when they became everyday appliances, not just giant electronic brains for big business and Big Brother. But the whole thing was so uncertain, so gloriously messy in practice, and no one was sure how it would turn out. There were so many different ideas about what a computer in the home was for, so many idiosyncratic designs of computer available, so many agendas at work. To people learning to program for themselves, it was a fascinating logic puzzle; to the kids it turned into a video games system; to the government it was going to be the technology that dragged the country into the information age and made Britain great again. Margaret Thatcher even showed off a Sinclair ZX Spectrum to the Prime Minister of Japan! Tying all that together into a bigger story about how 80's Britain learned to love the home computer has been a joy and something of a nostalgia trip for me – there aren't many people who get to play Manic Miner and call it research!

What's exciting you now? 

I'm really into current media stories about the social impact of disruptive information technologies and automation, how robots and computers will take our jobs and how society and the economy will have to adapt. Everyone seems to forget that back in the 1970s the techno-prophets were predicting  the same things with the same consequences, brought about by the 'Microchip Revolution' sweeping the world. We're still living through that revolution now, but people talk about it like it's a new thing. The answer then was teaching people to become computer literate to avoid being left behind. These days the answer is called learning to code, but amounts to pretty much the same thing. History really does repeat itself and it's intriguing to watch. 

What's next?

Hard to say right now, I have a few ideas floating around but I'm waiting for some of them to stick. For the last few years I've roamed the country interviewing scientists and engineers about their life stories as an oral historian for National Life Stories at the British Library. I've talked to everyone from physicists and rocket scientists to electrical engineers and bridge designers – it's been a real adventure and it would be great to find some ways of telling those stories. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...