It's already been much-debated. It's just hard to find the debate among the quasi-spam of the cult proselytizing: [EH == Economic History] EH.Res: FORUM: Path-dependence http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/ http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/nov/index.html EH.Res: Forum: More on QWERTY http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/index.shtml http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/mar/index.html http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/aug/index.html See particularly an article by one author debunking some L-M "debunking" "I have considerable sympathy with the criticism by L&M that some of the arguments for path dependency have been based "on poorly documented evidence that dissolves upon closer inspection." But their account in JLEO of this particular history is subject to the same critique." http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/nov/0049.html [Richard S. Rosenbloom, Harvard Business School, for credentials] Also: "Path dependence and the quest for historical economics: one more chorus of the ballad of QWERTY by Paul A. David" http://www.eh.net/Publications/pathdepend.shtml "At last, a remedy for chronic QWERTY-skepticism! by Paul A. David" http://www.eh.net/Publications/remedy.shtml __ Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf@sethf.com http://sethf.com Latest essay: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org) http://www.spectacle.org/0201/sethf.html