• Editorial
• Ruth Oldenziel

The production of this issue coincided with the Covid-19 pandemic unfolding across the globe. The health crisis has focused our minds on what we as scholars could thankfully still do from home in an ICT-rich environment, while others could not. Front-line personnel in healthcare, along with warehouse, food-processing, and delivery employees made it possible for us to work in the safety of our homes: networking with and facilitating a global network of scholars. Crises like Covid-19 bring into focus what is usually hidden from view. The technological history of flawed utopias— futures where innovations like information age technologies promised to be the answer to all social ills—should remind us that any kind of innovation has unequal benefits. Airplanes making the world accessible for elites carry the virus; the Internet’s ability to share information in the widest possible fashion has been the conveyer belt of conspiracy theories, as well as the favorite tool of autocratic regimes to quell dissent. Technology is thus a two-edged sword.

This issue comes to you at a time when the topic of racial inequality is occupying center stage in the public debate, as historic numbers of protesters take to the streets, beginning in the United States after the murder of George Floyd. The debate and the protests are now global: what does racial inequality mean in the context of colonial legacies? Technology is part of that story. In the United States, militarized police forces armed with assault weapons and ICT-technologies like body cameras enforce but bear witness to police brutality in new ways. Space technologies like remote sensing, GIS, and GPS paired with smartphones help farmers in India and the Sahel increase their crop yields, but governments also use these tools to kill their enemies with unprecedented precision. In nineteenth-century Europe, trains crossed borders, carried food, and helped emigrants escape pogroms and persecution; the reverse was also true: the train system became a cog in the killing machines of Nazi Germany during the Holocaust. Technologies can be tools to both maintain and undermine inequalities as social movements use them in unintended ways. Technology, though, is not just politics by other means, as scholars of technopolitics like Gabrielle Hecht, [End Page ix] Paul Edwards, and Anique Hommels argue. Technologies and political practices produce new forms of power and agency that shape a world of inequality in ways that are hard to “un-make.” As historians of technology, we are in a position to offer the much-needed reflection, context, and longterm perspectives on our contemporary challenges. As incoming editor, I extend an invitation to continue this debate within the journal’s pages.

Finally, this issue also has been produced at a time of transition in editorial leadership. We are grateful for Suzanne Moon and her team’s excellent work over the past decade. After sixty years, the journal is still standing on the broad shoulders of Mel Kranzberg, whose expansive vision continues to inspire and whose large shoes subsequent editors have sought to fill. Moon has succeeded in broadening the journal’s geographical coverage, in creating a nurturing environment for emerging scholarship, and in devoting attention to early career scholars has generated a wealth of research articles. Under her guidance, T&C has doubled in size in terms of sheer scholarship production. In the early days, the journal averaged twenty-five research articles a year, while today T&C publishes close to fifty—a rich harvest indeed. Moon also took the lead in creating Technology’s Stories—the site that makes technology scholarship in a range of formats available to all without a paywall. We are indebted to her achievement in making the journal a place where scholars find a welcoming home for their scholarly work. Under her guidance, the journal represents a vibrant community of scholars with an ever expanding range of knowledge.

It falls to us to protect what is precious about the journal, while looking forward as our publishing environment alters rapidly and requires new responses. One area demanding our attention is nurturing our community of readers. Reading habits are changing for several reasons. The exploding volume of scholarly work poses...

• 社论
• 露丝·奥尔登齐尔（Ruth Oldenziel）

此问题的产生与Covid-19大流行在全球范围内发生的时候不谋而合。健康危机已使我们的思想集中在作为学者的情况下，值得庆幸的是，在充满ICT的环境中，我们仍然可以在家中做一些事情，而其他人则不能。医疗保健领域的前线人员，以及仓库，食品加工和送货人员，使我们有可能在家庭安全中工作：与学者的全球网络建立联系并为之提供便利。像Covid-19这样的危机使人们通常看不到的东西成为焦点。有缺陷的乌托邦的技术历史-诸如信息时代技术之类的创新有望解决所有社会弊端的未来-应该提醒我们，任何种类的创新都具有不平等的利益。使精英人士可以进入世界的飞机携带这种病毒；互联网以最广泛的方式共享信息的能力一直是阴谋论的传送带，也是专制政权平息异议的最喜欢的工具。因此，技术是一把两刃剑。

当种族不平等的话题成为公众辩论的焦点之时，这个问题浮出水面，因为历史性的抗议者走上街头，始于乔治·弗洛伊德被谋杀后的美国。辩论和抗议活动现在已遍布全球：在殖民遗产的背景下，种族不平等意味着什么？技术就是这个故事的一部分。在美国，武装警察部队使用攻击性武器和诸如身体摄像机之类的ICT技术进行执法，但以新的方式见证了警察的野蛮行径。诸如遥感，GIS和GPS等空间技术与智能手机相结合，可以帮助印度和萨赫勒地区的农民提高农作物的产量，但各国政府也使用这些工具以前所未有的精度杀死敌人。在19世纪的欧洲，火车越过边界，运送食物，并帮助移民逃避大屠杀和迫害；反之亦然：大屠杀期间，火车系统成为纳粹德国杀人机器中的一枚齿轮。技术可以作为维持和消除不平等现象的工具，因为社会运动以不希望的方式使用它们。但是，技术不仅是通过其他方式进行的政治活动，例如Gabrielle Hecht等技术政治学的学者，[第ix页结束]保罗·爱德华兹（Paul Edwards）和安妮克·霍梅尔斯（Anique Hommels）争论。技术和政治实践产生了新的权力和代理形式，这些新形式的权力和代理以难以“超越”的方式塑造了世界不平等。作为技术史学家，我们能够就当代挑战提出急需的反思，背景和长期观点。作为新任编辑，我发出邀请，继续在期刊页面上进行辩论。

最后，这个问题也是在编辑领导权过渡时期产生的。我们感谢Suzanne Moon及其团队在过去十年中所做的出色工作。六十年后，该杂志仍然站在梅尔·克拉恩斯堡（Mel Kranzberg）的宽阔肩膀上，他的广阔视野不断鼓舞人心，后来的编辑们都力图填补这本大书。Moon成功地扩大了该杂志的地域覆盖范围，为新兴的学者创造了良好的成长环境，并致力于早期职业学者，从而产生了大量研究文章。在她的指导下，T＆C的纯粹奖学金规模翻了一番。早期，该杂志每年平均发表25篇研究文章，而今天，T＆C出版了将近五十本，确实丰收。Moon还带头创建了“技术故事”，该站点以各种格式向所有人提供技术奖学金，而无需付费。我们要感谢她的成就，使该期刊成为学者们为其学术工作锦上添花的地方。在她的指导下，该杂志代表了一个生机勃勃的学者社区，其知识范围不断扩大。

保护出版杂志的珍贵之处在于我们，而我们的出版环境日新月异，需要新的回应，这是我们的责任。需要我们关注的领域之一是培养我们的读者群体。阅读习惯的改变有几个原因。学术工作的爆炸式增长构成了...