Interesting how some of his criteria for new equipment, which rule out buying a computer, are very much consistent with the hacker spirit:

3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces.

4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces.

6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools.

7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible.

It seems to me that the next time he needs to get to another continent, he'll buy a bicycle.

If you can only see a computer as a more sophisticated sort of typewriter, this kind of flat dismissal isn't all that surprising.

While I appreciate many points of the article, I find it ironic that I read this rant on... the Internet. (of course it is old, and most likely transcribed by someone else, but still hilarious)

I saw this guy speak at my university my freshman year. He seemed like a bit of a technophobe. Also this article is 20+ years old, not that I think he has changed.

I heard him on "City Arts and Lectures" recently (a local program on KQED). He still didn't own a computer in 2010.

"My final and perhaps mv best reason for not owning a computer is that I do not wish to fool myself. I disbelieve, and therefore strongly resent, the assertion that I or anybody else could write better or more easily with a computer than with a pencil. I do not see why I should not be as scientific about this as the next fellow: when somebody has used a computer to write work that is demonstrably better than Dante's, and when this better is demonstrably attributable to the use of a computer, then I will speak of computcr with a more respectful tone of voice, though I still will not buy one."

Well, if he were writing with a computer, odds are good that it would have caught the typos "mv" and "computcr".

Frankly, this is a lot of hypocritical horse-puckey. If the author truly didn't want to be shackled to the "energy corporations", then he also wouldn't have a website, nor many other modern conveniences.

This was clearly copied or transcribed from another source. What gave you the idea that this was Wendell Barry's personal website? Do you have any idea who he is? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Berry)

> Well, if he were writing with a computer, odds are good that it would have caught the typos "mv" and "computcr".

Those are not typos; on neither QWERTY nor Dvorak keyboards are "v" and "y" close together, nor "c" and "e", and the letter sequences "mv" and "tcr" are far less common than the letter sequences "my" and "ter". No, those are OCR errors, made with a computer.

While I do not agree with his position, I think it's a little unfair to claim him to be hypocritical based on this article. The linked website is not his, though the text is written by him, and he lives without electricity or running water, and grows his own food (at least he did in the 90's, now I don't know.)

Kinda shooting fish in a barrel here, aren't we? Just a big communal pile-on invitation? A bit unseemly.