I find myself griping about a subject I've always associated with the complaints of older people: technology.

We assume that machines make no mistakes, and, if they do, we trust their judgment over our own.

I spent a lot more time and effort on writing the amounts than did the data entry person who wrongly encoded them, and the computer didn't know the difference. Machines are, after all, not independently intelligent.

 Help! I don't know if it's because I received my first AARP letter this spring or because I've been watching too many movies with Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau in them, but I'm becoming a grumpy old man. Really, I find myself griping about a subject I've always associated with the complaints of older people: technology.

Case number one: Last night I went to a local ice cream/burger spot to get my favorite late-evening snack, a small twist--chocolate and vanilla ice cream blended (twisted) together-- in a cup. Anyway, when the young man gave it to me, I quickly pointed out that I had asked for a twist, and the cup which I held in my hand had only about a spoonful of chocolate right on top. The rest was vanilla.

The clerk's response went something like this: "Look mister, our machine has three nozzle: vanilla on the left, chocolate on the right, and a twist in the middle. I pulled the middle lever, so you got a twist." To which I replied, "Yes, but this is NOT a twist." To which he replied, "Look, I only pull the lever. I'm not responsible for what comes out of it."

I wanted to say more, perhaps to ask whether if a burger had come out of the nozzle, he would still call it a twist, or maybe to ask if he thought he could try something really inventive, such as filling the cup half from the left nozzle and half from the right one; but I was tongue-tied. I just can't believe that our society has deified technology, meaning we assume that machines make no mistakes, and, if they do, we trust their judgment over our own, which brings me to case number two.

Earlier this month I received a long distance phone bill that showed I was past due on my account. It seems that in June I had paid only $14.83 of the $111.36 charges. I examined my checkbook and found that, yes, I had written a check for $111.36, so I wondered if I had put the wrong check in the envelope. But when I reviewed my bank statement, I found the canceled check. Yes, it was for $111.36. However, on closer examination, I discovered that the bank had debited my account for only $14.83. Strange, I thought.

Well, after several calls to an 800 number, where computers tried their best to keep me from talking with a real person, and after visiting with my bank, here's what I found out. The problem was an error with encoding. It seems that, when companies get our checks, they enter the amount paid in their database, and, at the same time, they encode that amount (print it) on the back of our checks. When our bank receives the check for payment, they don't look at our numbers on the front, but a computer scans the amount that has been encoded on the back.

How audacious! I spent a lot more time and effort on writing the amounts than did the data entry person who wrongly encoded them, and the computer didn't know the difference. Machines are, after all, not independently intelligent.

This evening the network news featured a special on the transcontinental, jumbo airliners of the future, which will be completely controlled by computers and, thus, have "no chance for pilot error."

Excuse me, but if that happens, this grumpy old man will take a boat.