Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.

[Speaking of computers] But they are useless. They can only give you answers.

Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.

Computers have no idea what goes on outside of them except what humans tell them.

All of the books in the world contain no more information than is broadcast as video in a single large American city in a single year. Not all bits have equal value.

The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.

The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.

I will argue that in the literal sense the programmed computer understands what the car and the adding machine understand, namely, exactly nothing.

Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes

Computers can never completely replace humans. They may become capable of artificial intelligence, but they will never master real stupidity.

Man in the electronic age has no possible environment except the globe and no possible occupation except information-gathering.

Any bit of nonsense can be computerized—astrology, biorhythms, the I Ching—but that doesn’t make the nonsense any more valid.

Pablo Picasso brilliantly anticipated this inversion in 1964 when he told the writer William Fifield, “Computers are useless. They only give you answers.” So

In the information society, nobody thinks. We expected to banish paper, but we actually banished thought.