Computer Centre Bulletin, Volume 2 Number 10, 6th October 1969

User Manual: Computer Centre Bulletin, Volume 2 Number 10, 6th October 1969

Open the PDF directly: View PDF PDF.
Page Count: 16

UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND
COMPUTER
CENTRE
COMPUTER
CENTRE
BULLETIN
_
uu~==~=========================
-..
.
.-
Volume 2, Number 10.
6th October, 1969.
Editor:
H.
L Smythe.
";'.\"
..
:"
THIS
EDITION
This
issue
of
the
Bulletin
contains
two
major
articles
that
should
be
of
interest
to
the
reader,
one
discussing,
in
general
terms,
the
position
of
the
law
and
computers,
and
the
other
describing
the
addition
of
hardware
to
the
PDP
10
to
improve
further
the
efficiency
of
multi-programming.
The
Bulletin
continues
to
inform
readers
of
FORTRAN
errors
on
the
PDP
10,
and
a
Letter
to
the
Editor
is
also
published.
LETTERS
TO
THE
EDITOR
Recent
events
have
shown
that
man
is
capable
of
travelling
to
the
moon
and
back
in
less
than
two
weeks.
In
the
same amount
of
time,
it
is
possible
for
any
of
us,
using
more
conventional
means
of
transport,
to
travel
around
the
world,
even
stopping
off
for
occasional
sight
seeing.
In
far
less
than
two
weeks,
as
recent
history
shows
us,
a
war
can
commence
and
be
won
-
or
lost,
according
to
one's
particular
outlook.
Yet
recently,
some
data
I
submitted
to
the
Computer
Centre
were
still
awaiting
preparation
after
two
weeks.
The
only
apparent
movement was
the
transposition
of
my name
from
the
end
of
a
list
to
a
position
third
from
the
top.
The
data
were
eventually
prepared
two
weeks
and
five
days
after
their
submission
and
subsequently
analysed
by
the
GE
225
in
four
minutes.
It
seems
to
me
that
this
situation
is
ludicrous
and
unnecessary.
If
the
university
is
able
to
spend
a
large.
sum
on
a modern
computer,
surely
it
should
be
possible
to
provide
those
ancillary
services
necessary
to
ensure
its
efficient
use.
If
one
has
to
wait
for
over
two weeks
to
have
one's
data
prepared,
efficient
use
of
the
computer
is
not
being
made.
Surely
it
is
possible
to
have
faster
data
preparation
than
thts.
Many
of
us
have
either
seen
or
heard
of
centres
where
a
delay
of
more
than
a
day
for
data
preparation
is
the
exception
rather
than
the
rule.
144
I
have
no
immediate
ambition
to
travel
to
the
mooh,
to
have
a
round-the-world
trip,
or
participate
in
a
war,
however
little
time
is
required.
But
together,
I
am
sure,
with
many
others
at
the
University
of
Queensland,
I
would
like
to
receive
my
prepared
data
cards
before
I
have
had
time
to
forget
what
they
are
all
about.
MaZcoZm
A. CoZston (Department
of
Education)~
5 GZencarron
Street~
Kenmore~
Q.
4069.
[Ed.
Note:-
Mr.
Colston's
lett~r
raises
a
query
about
the
type
and
quality
of
service
that
the
Computer
Centre
provides
for
keY-punching.
The
Centre
is
essentially
a
scientific
data-processing
centre,
not
a
data-preparation
centre.
The
data
preparation
service
we
offer
is
only
a
token
service.
In'fact,
departments
with
significant
punching
reciuestshave
installed
keypunches
for
their
own
data
preparation,
Our
records
show
that
the
average
turnaround
time
for
punching
is
approximately
three
days.
There
are,
however,
periods
when
the
delay
builds
up
because
of
sickness
or
changes
of
staff.
This
is
unfortunate,
but,to
guarantee
a
maximum.turnaround
time
of
only
one
or
two
days,
key-punching
staff
would
have
to
be
increased
considerably
in
order
to
cope
with
the
peak
demands
rather
than
the
average.
This
would
mean a
significant
increase
in
charges
for
punching,
and
would,
no
doubt,
inspire
numerous
Letters
to
the
Editor!
Incidentally,
Mr.
Colston's
implication
that
the
University
purchased
the
computer
and
finances
the
ancillary
services,
is
incorrect.
The
comp~ter
was
purchased
with
funds
from a
variety
of
sources,
the
University
contributing
about
one-third.
In
particular,the
University
does
not
contribute
to
the
Centre's
data-preparation
section.
In
fact,
the
cost
of
providing
the
key-punch
service
is
barely
covered
by
the
charges
~hat
are
made.]
..
FORTRAN
IV
ERRORS
1.
It
has
been
discovered
that
certain
types
of
integer
expressions
do
not
compile
correctly
on
the
PDP
10.
For
example:
K =
L*(N-l)+(M*(N-ll)/2
At
first
sight,
this
would seem
to
be
a
fundamental
ta~ling
ot
the
comp~ler.
However, a number
of
circumstances
must
exist
before
the
error
occurs.
(a)
There
must
be
some
common
expression
in
the
statement.
In
the
above
example,
this
is
(N-l).
1'.......
6,..
11
~
.....
'BETTER
GET
THE
A.S.1.0. ONTO THIS'
(b)
This
common
expression
must
be
further
operated
on by
other
var;taole$,
different
for
each
occurrence
of
the
common
expTession,
e.g.
L*(N-l)
and
M*(N-l}
(c)
The
last
of
these
composite
expressions
:must
oe
further
operated
on
by
an
integer
divide,
e.g.
(M*(N-lll/2
Incorrect
code
is
generated
by
the
compiler.
If
anyone
of
the
aoove
conditions
does
not
exist~
the
correct
code
wtll
oe
produced,
It
is
emphasized
that
the
problem
occurs
only
with
integer
expressions.
146
2.
Variable
dimensioning
of
arrays
is
permissible
within
subroutines
and
is
a
convenient
means
of
creating
a
generalized
routine
for,
say,
matrix
manipulation.
Where
the
type
of
an
array
is
not
implicitly
defined,
the
appropriate
type
statement
must
appear
before
the
dimensioning
statement
for
correct
results,
although
documentation
would
lead
one
to
believe
that
the
order
of
specification
statements
is
not
significant.
Thus:
or
are
correct,
but
SUBROUTINE
SR(A,Nl,N2)
COMPLEX
A
DIMENSION
A(Nl,N2)
SUBROUTINE
SR(A,Nl,N2)
COMPLEX
A(Nl,N2)
SUBROUTINE
SR(,A,Nl,N2)
DIMENSION
A(Nl,N2)
COMPLEX
A
will
lead
to
incorrect
results.
3.
GE
225
FORTRAN
IV
ERROR
The
form
of
expression
that
may
be
used
as
a
subscript,
is
limited
to
a
few
simple
expression
types
and
does
not
include
the
use
of
a
subscripted
integer
variable.
Thus,
an
expression
of
the
form:
141
DIMENSION
A(12),II(15),JJ(15),X(15)
A(II(J))
=
A(II(J))
+
X(JJ(J))
will
not
produce
correct
code
although
no
compilation
error
is
generated.
While
the
compiler
may,
in
fact,
produce
the
correct
code
in
some
similar
cases,
it
cannot
be
relied
upon
to
do
this,
and
thus
should
not
be
used.
Any
suspected
errors
should
be
reported
to
the
Administrative
Officer
(Mr.
John
Jauncey,
extension
8471).
PDP
10
MEMORY
PROTECTION,
AND
RELOCATION
E.
J.
SokoU
In
a
previous
article,
Mu~tiprooessing
Conoepts
by
1.
Oliver
(Vol.
2,
No.3,
3rd
March,
1969),
reference
was made
to
the
concept
of
multiprogramming
and
the
necessity
for
special
hardware
to
provide
this
method
of
operation.
This
feature
is
available
on
the
PDP
10
and
allows
a
preset
number
of
programs
to
be
executed,
even
though
they
may
not
all
exist
in
core
at
the
same
time.
This
is
achieved
by
swapping
programs
between
core
memory
and
the
fixed
head
disk
(which
has
the
characteristics
of
a drum)
as
dictated
by
the
core
space
requirements
of
the
program
to
be
executed.
Thus,
in
the
process
of
execution,
a
program
may
be
swapped
in
and
out
of
core
many
times.
Under
these
conditions
,
it
is
desirable
that
a
program
be
capable
of
execution
regardless
of
where
it
is
stored
in
memory.
This
capability
is
provided
by
hardware
relooation.
Since
a number
of
programs,
including
the
executive
for
controlling
the
operation
of
the
whole
system,
may
exist
in
memory
at
the
one
time,
provision
must
be
made
to
ensure
that
these
programs
do
not
destroy
one
another,
and
this
is
provided
by
hardware
proteotion.
Before
describing
the
operation
of
the
relocation
and
protection
hardware,
it
is
necessary
to
consider
the
events
leading
to
the
execution
of
a
program.
As
a
result
of
compilation
or
assembly
of
a
source
program,
a
relocatable
148
object
program
is
produced,
where
the
instruction
addresses
are
relative
to
zero.
By
means
of
a
relocatable
or
linking
loader,
a number
of
relocatable
\
programs
and
subprograms
may
be
combined,
or
linked
into
a
composite
program
ready
for
execution.
The
linking
of
program
A,
consisting
of
subprograms
AI,
A2
and
A3
of
length
k,
m
and
n,
respectively,
is
illustrated
in
Figure
1.
0 0
Al Al
k-l
Program
-
-------
k
A2
A
-
--
------
k+m
0
A3
A2
m-I
k+m+n
o
n-I
Before
linking
After
linking
Figure
1.
LinkJ.ng
of.
Program
A
The
addresses
of
programs
AI'
A2
and
A3
were
each
originally
relative
to
zero.
After
operation
of
the
relocatable
loader,
addresses
of
programs
A2
and
A3
have
undergone
software
relocation
by
an
amount
k,
and
k + m
respectively,
and
now
all
addresses
in
the
complete
program
A
are
relative
to
zero.
So
far
then,
the
individual
subprograms
and
.components
of
a
complete
program
have
been
linked
together,
relocation
of
addresses
has
taken
place,
and
the
program
is
ready
for
execution.
However,
the
program
will
not
be
stored
from
physical
location
zero
since
the
resident
executive
occupies
the
first
16K
of
memory. The
executive
will
determine
what
physical
space
the
program
will
occupy.
To
ensure
that
the
program
will
be
executed
correctly
in
the
physical
addressing
space,
relocation
of
addresses
must
be
performed.
This
is
achieved
by
hardware
reZocation
during
execution
of
the
program.
To
simplify
the
design
and
implementation
of
the
protection
and
relocation
hardware,
core
memory
is
divided
in
blocks
of
lK
words.
To
ensure
that
each
program
is
loaded
at
the
start
of
a
block,
each
program
is
allocated
an
integral
number
of
lK
blocks.
The
program
A
illustrated
in
Figure
1
occupies
k + m + n
locations,
and
may
require
PI
+ 1
blocks
of
core
memory,
designated
o
to
fl'
Clearly,
a
portion
of
the
last
block,
PI'
may
not
be
utilized.
When
a
program
is
placed
in
core
memory
for
execution,
it
must
be
stored
beginning
at
a
lK
boundary.
As
shown
in
Figure
2,
the
program
A
occupies
PI
+ 1
blocks,
starting
at
block
RI'
However,
the
addresses
in
program
A
are
still
Block
No.
Q
(Pl+l)K
words
A
P
logical
addressing
space
Executive
Other
User
Programs
A
Other
User
Programs
Non~
1/
777777
__
e~/x_i.s_t~~_nt~~.
physical
addressing
space
Figure
2.
Logical
and
Physical
Addressing
150
relative
to
zero
prior
to
execution.
The
valuesof
protection,
Pl,
and
relocation
Rl,
are
placed
in
the
protection
and
relocation
registers
respectively
by
the
executive.
When
execution
begins,
a memory
reference
is
first
checked
to
ensure
that
it
is
legal.
The number
of
the
block
of
memory
being
addressed
is
compared
with
the
contents
of
the
protection
register,
and
if
the
block
number
exceeds
Pl'
execution
of
program
A
is
interrupted
and
control
is
transferred
to
another
program.
In
this
case,
the
executive
would
indicate
that
an
illegal
memory
reference
had
occurred.
If
the
protection
check
is
satisfactory.,
then
relocation
is
performed
to
transform
the
relative
program
address
to
an
absolute
physical
memory
address.
This
is
achieved
by
adding
the
contents
of
the
relocation
register,
R1,
to
the
relative
program
address.
This
is
not
done on
all
addresses.
Index
registers
and
accumulators
reference
one
of
the
first
sixteen
locations
in
memory,
and
since
these
are
integrated
circuit
registers
with
a
very
low
access
time,
relocation
is
not
performed
to
allow
all
programs
to
use
these
high
performance
registers.
Program
A
may
be
swapped
out
of
core
and
later
swapped
back
in'to
continue
execution.
If
this
occurs,
it
is
not
necessary
for
A
to
occupy
the
same
physical
area
that
it
occupied
previously,
nor
is
it
likely
or
desirable.
Before
execution
of
A
is
continued,
the
executive
reloads
the
relocation
register
with
the
appropriate
relocation
constant.
This
constant
is
sometimes
referred
to
as
the
base
address.
A
program
may
also
dynamically
alter
its
memory
requirements,
in
which
case
the
executive
will
modify
the
contents
of
the
protection
register
to
allow
more
or
less
memory
to
be
used
by
a
program.
In
a
static
situation,
during
which
swapping
is
not
in
operation,
a number
of
programs
may
exist
in
core
memory. A
program
in
the
executive,
known
as
the
$aheduZel'~
determines
which
program
should
be
run
next.
When
this
is
determined,
the
executive
will
set
the
appropriate
values
in
the
protection
and
relocation
register,
and
pass
control
to
the
selected
program.
After
a
short
period
of
time,
control
may
be
passed
to
another
program
which
requires
use
of
the
processor,
but
with
values
for
pro.tection
and
relocation
which
apply
to
this
particular
program.
So
far,
the
operation
of
a
simple
form
of
relocation
and
protection
which
was
incorporated
in
the
PDP
10
has
been
described.
Recently;
additional
hardware
has
been
installed
in
the
PDP
10
to
improve
further
the
efficiency
of
multiprogramming.
This
additional
hardware
includes
a
second
set
of
proteation
and
relocation
registers,
and
the
advantages
of
this
feature
are
now
discussed.
151
It
is
possible
that
a number
of
jobs
may
require
a
FORTRAN
compilation.
In
the
original
PDP
10
system,
a
copy
of
FORTRAN
compiler
was
loaded
for
each
job
which
required
it,
requiring
11K
of
memory
for
each
copy
of
the
compiler.
With
more
than
two
such
jobs,
swapping
was
necessary
to
service
other
programs
requesting
access
to
the
processor.
As
the
number
of
programs
requiring
execution
increases.
then
the
processor
is
involved
in
a
larger
amount
of
swapping,
and
so
processor
efficiency
decreases.
It
also
results
in
a
poor
response
time
of
terminals
in
a
time-sharing
system.
A
program
may
be
designed
so
that
it
is
capable
of
being
re-entered
by
a number
of
different
programs.
With
this
capability.
a
re~entrant
program
may
be
shared
by
any
task
in
the
system
which
requires
it.
For
frequently-used
programs
such
as
the
FORTRAN
compiler,
this
capability
is
very
desirable,
since
only
one
copy
of
the
compiler
is
required
in
core.
In
general,
a
re-entrant
program
consists
of
a pure
part
and
an
impure
part.
The
pure
part
is
that
part
of
a
program
which
is
never
modified
during
execution,
and
would
normally
include
most
of
the
instructions
and
constants,
while
the
impure
part
may
be
modified
during
execution.
and
would
include
areas
for
buffers,
tables
and
results.
In
the
case
of
the
PDP
10
FORTRAN
compiler,
the
pure
part
occupies9K,
while
the
minimum
size
of
the
impure
part
is
2K.
With
32K
of
memory
available,
a maximum
of
11
FORTRAN
compilations
could
be
performed
without
the
need
for
swapping.
If
swapping
is
necessary.
only
the
impure
part
is
swapped
out
onto
disk,
with
a
resultant
saving
in
the
swapping
time,
and
more
economic
utilization
of
disk
storage.
For
flexibility,
it
is
desirable
that
the
two
parts
of
are-entrant
program
occupy
non-contiguous
areas
of
memory,
and~
to
ensure
execution
of
either
part
and
access
from
one
part
to
the
other,
two
sets
of
protection
and
relocation
registers
are
used.
To
ensure
that
the
pure
part
is
not
altered,
the
hardware
can
be
enabled
to
prevent
information
being
written
into
this
part.
In
this
environment,
as
control
is
passed
from
one
job
to
another,
the
executive
now
must
load
both
set~
of
reg~sters
with
the
appropriate
values.
152
Figure
3
illustrates
the
transformation
from
logical
addresses
to
physical
addresses
with
the
two
sets
of
registers.
PI
and
RI
are
the
values
of
protection
and
relocation
for
the
impure
part,
while
P2
and
R2
are
the
values
of
protection
and
relocation
for
the
pure
part.
PI
Impure A
o 0 f
-t
Executive
R2
f
RI
1
II
Other
Users
-
roo-
I~
Impure A
x
Other
Users
1
x
Pure
A
Pure
A
1//
Illegal
Other
Users
777777 ... I
__
I ___
-L
7777
77
l/NI
/ / / I
on-existent/
I I I I
logical
addressing
space
l?li.y~;tcal
address:;[.ng
space
Figure
3.
Relation
between
Logical
and
Physical
addressing.space
with
dual
protection·
and
relocation
153
There
is
no
doubt
that
the
re-entrant
hardware
will
improve
the
efficiency
of
the
multiprogramming
capability
of
the
PDP
10.
The
executive
and
system
programs
such
as
the
FORTRAN
compiler
have
been
modified
to
make
use
of
the
re-entrant
hardware,
Externally,
there
will
be
no
noticeable
difference
in
batch
jobs.
When
time
sharing
is
provided,however,
it
should
mean
that
a
larger
number
of
users
will
be
serviced
without
any
reduction
in
response
time.
THE
lAW
AND
COMPUTERS
This
artiole
is
adapted from
the
Inaugural Leoture
of
Douglas J.
Whalan,
LL.B.
(N.Z.),
LL.M.
(N.Z.),
Ph.D. (Otago),
Professor
of
Law
in
the
University
of
Queensland.
The
University
of
Queensland Press
is
to
publish
the
leoture
in
its
Inaugural Leoture
Series.
Professor
Whalan
was
born
in
New
Zealand
in
1929,
qualifying
as a
solioitor
(1950) and
barrister
(1951)
of
tne
Supreme
Coux>t
of
New
ZeaZand.
In
1958,
he
was
appointed
Senior
Leoturer
in
Law
at
the
University
of
Auokland, and gained
the
first
Dootorate
of
Philosophy
in
Law
to
be awarded
by a
New
Zealand
University.
While
on
study
.leave
in
London
in
1963-1964,
Professor
Whalan
furthered
his
researoh
into
the
registration
of
titles
to
land.
From
1964-1967
he
was
suooessively
Visiting
Fellow, Fellow and
Senior
Fellow
in
the
Researoh Sohool
of
Sooial
Soienoes
at
the
Australian
National
University,
and,
in
1967, he
was
appointed
Professor
of
Law
at
the
University
of
Queensland.
Professor
Whalan
is
a
member
of
a Federal
Attorney-General's
Working
Group
on
Refo~
in
the
Australian
Capital
Territory.
His
publioations
inolude
a book
on
the
law
of
trusts
and
trustees,
and numerous
artioles
on
the
fields
of
wills,
equity,
registration
of
titles
t9
land, and oomputers
and
the
law.
In
his
Inaugural
Lecture,
Professor
Whalan
pointed
out
that
the
issue
of
the
law
and
computers
was
of
vital
importance
to
the
development
of
law
in
society.
He
strongly
deprecated
the
fact
that,
in
its
attitude
towards
computers,
Australian
society
was,
like
Gaul,
divided
into
three
parts
-
one
part
fears,
one
sneers,
and
the
other
cheers.
Regrettably,
said
Professor
Whalan,
the
law
barely
hears
I
This
is
one
of
the
principal
themes
of
the
lecture:
either
lawyers
quickly
wake up
or
they
will
be
run
over
by
the
rapidly-revolving
wheels
of
the
computer
revolution.
Professor
Whalan
also
discussed
the
legal
problems
arising
from
the
application
of
computer
technology
to
fields
such
as
tort,
evidence,
individual
freedom
and
privacy.
The
conclusion
he
reaChes
is
that
154
radical
legislative
changes
are
urgently
needed
to
meet
the
demands
of
the
computer
age.
The
lawyer
must
think
for
the
future,
be
flexible
and
ready
to
adapt;
above
all,
he
must
recognize
that
scientific
devel.opments
can
be
used
to
assist
him,
not
to
enslave
him.
Professor
Whalan
described
briefly
.four
main
ways
of
using
the
computer
in
legal
practice
and
analysis.
Firstly,
the
computer
is
an
invaluable
tool
which
can
rapidly
and
efficiently
perform
the
more mundane
functions
of
costing,
accounting,
and
general
clerical
and
office
management
work.
However,
the
problem
of
confidentiality
arises
as
material
will
be
processed
outside
the
regulating
bounds
of
the
law
office
by
an
independent
person
who
is
not
bound
by
legal
ethics.
Secondly,
the
computer
provides
convenient
facilities
for
storage
as
a memory
bank
that
never
forgets.
This
power
to
retrieve
information
can
be
used
to
produce
legal
documents composed
of
stored
data,
and,
at
a more
advanced
level,
it
may
be
used
to
assist
lawyers
in
analysing
and
comparing
matter.
Thirdly,
statistical
material
can
be
processed
with
different
variables
used,
and
predictions
may
be
made
to
assess
future
trends.
England,
Professor
Whalan
pointed
out,
was
using
data
collected
on
accident
cases
and
awards
in
this
way.
Fourthly,
and
perhaps
the
most
complex
of
all,
court
judgments
and
statutes
could
be
stored,
indexed
and
analysed
to
determine
prevailing
judicial
attitudes
and
plan
future
legislation.
As
this
process
depends
very
much on
the
particular
interpretation
that
the
person
doing
the
processing
gives
to
certain
phrases,
the
number
of
combinations
and
resulting
complexity
are
greatly
increased.
Professor
Whalan
said
that
he
was
not
being
unrealistic
in
his
desire
to
use
computer
techniques
to
revolutionize
law
and
to
rationalize
law
reform
in
Australasia.
His
conclusions,
in
fact,
were
derived
from
successful
methods
that
were
already
operating
in
several
U.S.
jurisdicttons,
and
would
soon
be
instituted
in
England.
While
he
admitted
that
the
great
cost
of
the
computer
was
an
inhibiting
factor,
he
said
that
this
was no
suitable
reason
for
postponing
feasibility
studies.
Professor
Whalan
then
went
on
to
discuss
SOme
of
the
areas
in
which
problems
were
likely
to
arise
with
the
application
of
computer
technology
to
most
fields
of
law.
One
major
problem
area
was
the
quest;tcm
0f
the
valj:d;t.tY'
of
evidence.
As
most
data
are
supplied
to
a
computer
through
human
agency,
the
aearsay
rule
is
held
to
apply
unless
all
the
data
are
sworn
to
in
the
Court
by
the
particular
individual
155
who
initially
supplied
the
data.
This
problem,
said
Professor
Whalan,
requires
urgent
legislation.
Professor
Whalan
also
mentioned
the
difficulties
in
probing
and
investigating
evidence
as
he
pointed
out
that
identical
output
can
result
from
the
same
program
and
data
run
on
similar
computers.
With
interesting
far-sightedness,
Professor
Whalan
suggested
the
use
of
the
simulation
processes
to
aid
in
the
obtaining
of
evidence
by
setting
up
the
conditions
of
the
situation.
Professor
Whalan
then
discussed
the
issue
of
to~t
or
civil
iiability,
an
increasingly
significant
question
as
computers
become
generally
accepted
in
all
kinds
of
enterprise.
In
this
context,
Professor
Whalan
pointed
out
that
it
could
become
negligence
not
to
use
the
superior
facilities
of
a
computer!
Will
it,
he
asked,
be
negligence
to
disregard
the
use
of
simulation
models
to
test
stresses
and
strains
when
building
an
aircraft
or
a
motor
car
or
a
bridge?
Will
it
be
negligence
for
the
doctor
to
ignore
the
availability
of
computer
diagnostic
programs?
Problems
are
also
raised
as
to
precisely
where
liability
lies
should
a
mistake
occur.
These
are
only
a few
of
the
issues
that
will
be
reality
for
Australian
law
in
the
very
near
future.
While
Professor
Whalan
indicated
that
there
was
cause
for
concern
with
numerous
other
fields
such
as
insurance,
copyright,
patents,
property
and
labour
relations,
he
felt
that
the
issues
of
p~ivaay
and
individual
f~eedom
in
particular
required
serious
thought.
He
warned
that,
if
no
legislative
action
is
taken,
individual
freedom
will
be
blighted
and
our
personal
rights
of
privacy
destroyed
by
indiscriminate
access
to
computerized
information.
With
an
apt
misquotation
of
Sir
Winston
Churchill,
Professor
Whalan
said
that
never
in
the
history
of
human
endeavour
has
there
been
the
opportunity
for
so
much
to
be
made
available
to
so
many
by
so
few.
He
pointed
out
that
not
since
the
Domesday
Book
of
William
the
Conqueror
was
such
a
vast
amount
of
personal
information
available
about
the
individual,
ranging
from
his
health
record
to
his
business
and
financial
assets.
This
was
accessible
to
both
governmental
and
private
authorities,
to
be
used
and
misused.
The
computer
simply
collates
quickly
and
efficiently
all
the
scattered
records
existing
in
various
places
about
each
person.
With
grim
accuracy,
it
can
add
and
delete
information,
recall
selected
facts
instantly,
and,
ominously,
forget
nothing.
Professor
Whalan
pointed
out
that
legislation
must
be
enacted
concerning
data
banks:
it
should
not
be
156
piecemeal,
but
rather
an
overall
legislative
provision
dealing
with
the
problem
as
a
whole.
Professor
Whalan
also
suggested
that
information
supplied
unknowingly
through
the
use
of
secret
or
bugging
devices
be
dealt
with
severely.
However,
information
supplied
knowingly
had
considerable
complications.
Should,
for
example,
information
given
willingly
for
one
purpose
be
used
for
another
purpose?
Should
governmental
and
private
agencies
have
access
to
the
same memory dumps?
How
can
a
person
know
whether
the
information
supplied
about
him
is
accurate
or
not?
If
inaccurate,
can
the
person
sue
for
damages,
and
whom
lor
what}
does
he
sue?
Broadly,
said
Professor
Whalan,
rules
must
be
established
to
restrict
access
to
records,
be
they
accurate
or
inaccurate.
PrOfessor
Whalan
then
put
forth
the
interesting
concept
of
habeas notae
("that
you
may
have
the
writings")
to
control
information
banks.
Thus,
if
a
person
knows
or
suspects
that
a
record
is
maintained
about
him
in
a
data
bank
or
computer
complex,
he
will
be
legally
empowered
to
ask
for
a copy
of
its
contents.
Professor
Whalan
said
that
the
idea
of
habeas notae
could
be
extended
to
include
records
other
than
those
which
are
maintained
by
the
computer.
Towards
the
end
of
his
lecture,
Professor
Whalan
pointed
out
that
today's
legislation
explosion
must
be
tamed
and
rechannelled
with
the
aid
of
computer
technology.
There
was a
great
need
to
stem
this
legislative
and
interpretative
explosion,
the
39
miles
of
law
books
in
the
American
Library
of
Congress
being
a
typical
example.
Professor
Whalan
urged
lawyers
to
take
advantage
of
the
computer
age,
to
use
the
computer
to
lessen
burdens
of
technical
routine,
and
make
the
lawyer
freer
to
think
and
create.
He
did
not
envisage
the
computer
replacing
the
judge
and
jury.
but
said
it
was a
useful
tool
to
handle
the
ever-growing
quantity
of
legal
material.
Law
must
be
stable,
he
said,
but
it
must
not
stand
still.
By
harnessing
computer
facilities,
the
lawyer
will
be
relieved
of
laborious
detail;
he
will
be
free
to
analyse,
interpret
and
plan
for
the
future.
157

Navigation menu