中文

1. 这一年的世界：个人计算开始有了“可买、可用、可扩展”的形态

如果只看全球视角，1980 年并不是“计算机刚出现”的时代——计算早已存在于大型机与机构系统中。但在 1980 附近，变化开始变得具体：个人计算走向可规模化的商品形态，软件开始具备独立价值，计算开始从“机构能力”向“个人工具”下沉。

这意味着三件事：

• 计算开始从“资源”变成“工具”。资源被集中管理，工具被个人掌握。
• 软件开始从“配件”变成“产品”。硬件差异会被抹平，生态成为决定因素。
• 标准与兼容开始变成“隐形的权力”。谁定义格式与接口，谁就控制迁移成本。

2. 同一年在中国：计算更像一种“被调用的能力”，而不是“被拥有的物品”

把镜头转回国内，1980 年的“计算”并不在家庭里，也不在普通人的日常消费里。它主要以三种入口存在：

2.1 机构入口：统计、财务、档案、科研

当计算稀缺时，它首先被用于信息密度高、错误代价高、且能被流程化的领域：统计、财务、档案管理、科研计算、工程计算。

这类场景的共同点是：有明确的数据对象、有明确的结果标准、有可重复的流程。计算最先改变的往往不是“表达方式”，而是“组织方式”：数据如何收集、谁负责录入、如何校验、如何归档。

2.2 工业入口：工程与管理的可计算化

对工厂而言，计算的第一步往往不是自动化生产线，而是工程、计划、质量记录这些更靠近“管理节奏”的环节。它改变的是管理节奏：计划更细、追踪更频繁、反馈更快。

2.3 教育入口：计算作为技能的确立

教育体系的意义不在于“当年教了多少台机器”，而在于它开始告诉人们：未来的工作会需要这种能力。技术进入教育体系，会制造“技能代差”，并重排岗位定义。

3. 国内与全球的差异，不是“有没有机器”，而是“计算的组织方式不同”

对照两张切片，差异主要来自三个机制：

• 供给与可获得性：计算是稀缺资源还是普遍工具
• 生态与分发：软件是流通商品还是单位内部工具
• 标准与兼容：格式与接口决定迁移成本

4. 三个小信号：时代常常从“不方便”开始

1. 录入成本显形：系统需要数据，录入成为瓶颈

2. 兼容性争夺浮出水面：格式成为边界，边界创造依赖

3. 岗位定义开始改变：工具带来可复制性，也带来结构性淘汰

5. 本章结尾：计算作为能力，开始被组织化

1980 年的意义不在某台机器，而在于：计算开始被纳入组织的治理方式，成为一种可训练、可复制、可扩张的能力。它还没有进入家庭，但它已经在改变“组织如何看待信息”。

6. 个人切片：学长们诉说（口述/回忆）

（注：以下为口述与回忆整理，细节可能因时间久远而有偏差。）

我第一次真正把“计算”当成一件现实的事，不是因为见到某台具体的机器，而是因为听学长们说起它。

他们讲得并不浪漫。更多时候，那是一种带着敬畏的、略微压低音量的叙述：

“那东西很贵，很稀缺。” “不是谁都能碰，得排队。” “上机之前要准备得很充分，错一步就浪费时间。”

他们说起“上机”的场景，总会提到机房与实验室：门一关，声音就被收住了，空气里有一种规矩——你得先把东西写清楚，再把时间交给机器。能写出正确的程序，像是掌握了一门手艺。

有一段话我一直记得，大意是：

“计算机不会替你思考，它只会放大你的思考方式。你怎么写，它就怎么做。”

这句话在当年很朴素，但它其实预告了后来几十年的现实：工具并不会自动带来正确，正确来自清晰的定义、可靠的数据、可检查的过程。

这一章就停在这里：计算尚未进入家庭，但它已经开始进入叙事——进入那些更早看见它的人嘴里。时代往往就是这样开始的：先有传闻，再有技能，再有制度，最后才有普及。

---

English

1. The world in 1980: personal computing begins to look buyable, usable, and expandable

From a global vantage point, 1980 is not “the beginning of computers.” Large systems already exist. What becomes newly tangible around this time is shape: personal computing starts to resemble a scalable consumer form; software begins to carry independent value; and computing slowly descends from institutional capability toward personal tool.

Three shifts matter:

• Computing moves from “resource” to “tool.” Resources are scheduled; tools are held.
• Software moves from “accessory” to “product.” Over time, ecosystems outlive hardware advantages.
• Standards and compatibility become quiet power. Formats and interfaces decide migration costs.

2. The same year in China: computing as a capability you request, not a thing you own

In 1980, computing is largely absent from the household and everyday consumption. It enters through three doors: institutions, industry, and education.

2.1 Institutions: statistics, finance, archives, research

Scarce computing is first used where information is dense and mistakes are expensive. The earliest transformation is not expression but organization: how data is collected, entered, checked, and archived.

2.2 Industry: making engineering and management computable

For factories, the first step is rarely “computers on the shop floor.” It is engineering, planning, and quality records—the parts of production that set the cadence of management. Plans become finer; tracking becomes more frequent; feedback tightens.

2.3 Education: computing becomes a skill

The point of education is not how many machines exist, but that a society starts to declare: this capability will matter. Once taught as a skill, computing produces a skill gap—and skill gaps reorder jobs.

3. The difference is not “machines vs. no machines,” but organization

What separates the two slices is less the existence of hardware than the way computing is organized:

• availability: scarce capability vs. common tool
• distribution: internal utility vs. market circulation
• standards: formats and interfaces as borders

4. Three early signals: eras often begin as inconveniences

1. the cost of data entry surfaces

2. compatibility becomes a contest

3. job definitions begin to shift

5. Closing: computing becomes organized capability

The significance of 1980 is not a particular machine. It is that computing starts to be treated as an organizational capability—trainable, repeatable, expandable. It has not entered the home, but it is already changing how institutions think about information.

6. A personal vignette: what the seniors said (oral memory)

(Note: the following is reconstructed from oral accounts and memory; details may drift with time.)

I first felt “computing” become real not by seeing a specific machine, but by hearing older students talk about it.

They did not romanticize it. Their stories were practical, almost hushed:

“It’s expensive. It’s scarce.” “You don’t just touch it—you queue.” “You prepare everything before you go in. One mistake wastes precious time.”

When they spoke of going on the machine, the scene was always the same: the computer room, the lab, the door closing behind you, the room turning quiet. There was a kind of discipline in the air—write it clearly first, then hand your time to the machine. To make a program run correctly sounded less like magic than like craft.

One line stayed with me:

“The computer won’t think for you. It only amplifies the way you think. Whatever you write—that’s what it will do.”

Plain words, back then. But they forecast the decades that followed: tools do not guarantee correctness. Correctness comes from clear definitions, reliable data, and processes you can inspect.

So I end this chapter here: computing has not yet entered the household, but it has entered the stories—carried in the voices of those who saw it earlier. An era often begins that way: rumor first, then skill, then institutions—then, finally, mass adoption.