This is however what happens to some degree - it is impossible to be sure
that any software is totally bug-free - for reasons that are not merely
technical but rooted in the epistemological constraints we all face. See
Brian Cantwell-Smith's excellent article (1996 / 1985). Limits of
correctness in computers. In Computerization and Controversy: Value
conflicts and social choices, 2nd edition (Kling, R., ed), 810-25, Academic
Press, San Diego.
>well, I don't remember having *any* theory either - which makes me
>an 'ignorant' and 'unreflective' consumer of keyboards, but the
>point is that I was assuming that the keyboard was optimized for
>speed and/or convenience;
It was ca 1880. Isn't the point that it's persisted because (a) for a long
time the only people who typed a lot were trained to do so and could
therefore adjust to the keyboard; (b) the technology remained fundamentally
the same over a long period.
It just occurs to me that for a touch-typist there is no reason why the
QWERTY keyboard should be any more difficult than an ABCDEF keyboard. Both
need to be internalised in such a way that the fingers match the keys. It's
only easier for people who need to look at the keyboard. I think alternative
keyboards are sold either on the basis that they are easier to learn
initially or that they permit higher speeds, but not that they are somehow
instinctive.
Bruce Robinson