And a third note (IMHO rather nasty) from Cassin.
Anita Cohen-Williams; Reference Services; Hayden Library
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1006
PHONE: (602) 965-4579 FAX: (602) 965-9169
INTERNET: [log in to unmask] Owner: HISTARCH
*** Forwarding note from CASSIN --CMSNAMES 10/29/94 09:02 ***
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@ASUACAD) by
ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7334; Sat,
29 Oct 1994 09:02:11 -0700
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 09:59:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Dr. Richard Cassin" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: Archaeology List <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Dr. Richard Cassin" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gadgets, Garbage, and Goodies
X-To: "Ned Heite, Old F**T" <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list ARCH-L <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Ned & Colleagues:
One tires of Old Farts incapable of giving up their quill pens.
"Fortunately, (they) will pass, like a boil in an uncomfortable place",
long before the useful technologies that they (OF's) have been unwilling
or incapable of grasping.
There is no doubt that there have been inept and/or inappropriate uses of
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) not only by archaeologists, but by
practitioners of other disciplines as well. Use of a technology by those
ill-trained in effective use of that technology does not, per se,
invalidate its use by those who DO know what they're doing. That's simply
more "old-fartism" at its classic worse.
There are MANY archaeologists who DO know what they're doing with GIS AND
other new and useful technologies, and they are to be applauded for their
progressiveness and foresight. Let's educate and train those who are so
inclined, and ignore the "Old Farts" who are not.
Richard C. Cassin, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Ocean Sciences Research Institute
San Diego, CA, USA
([log in to unmask])
On Fri, 28 Oct 1994, Ned Heite, Old F**T wrote:
> The discussion of pot recovery, which degenerated into
> neo-Luddite discussion of GPR, GIS, video, and other
> contraptionisms, is just the latest in a long line of
> fads. Remember when we all were required to sort out the
> intestinal worm remains? That passed eventually and we
> do the fecal bug bit only when it is warranted.
>
> This year, we are all doing GIS, need it or not.
>
> Dan, you are a little behind the times. We dragged electrodes
> around sites several years back, somewhat after the coke bottles
> and bent coat hangers.
>
> Beware the GIS. Fortunately, it will pass, like a boil in an
> uncomfortable place.
>
> I recently sat through an interminable paper by a bunch of academics
> who tinkered with GIS at great expense to their sponsors, inputting
> all sorts of old maps and overlaying them over a modern street plan.
> When all was said and done, these GIS experts got hopelessly lost,
> and they hadn't done anything that you couldn't achieve at your
> local digital photocopier.
>
> At the break a bunch of us old f**ts had a good laugh at the
> "achievements" of the GIS.
>
> On a sadder note, I recently had the misfortune to use a GIS-generated
> report prepared by the previous consultant, who had simply slapped a
> bunch of re-scaled old maps into a CADD file. He ended up with five or
> six reference numbers for each property, because he didn't bother to
> interpret the results of his GIS-combining. The result was an immense
> waste of government money on a worthless sandwich of intellectual
> garbage that must be carefully refuted and reexamned by every future
> consultant who has the misfortune to work on that particular government
> installation.
>
|