Human-Nets-Request%rutgers@brl-bmd.UUCP (03/10/84)
HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 9 Mar 1984 Volume 7 : Issue 24
Today's Topics:
Response to Query - Computer Culture,
Computers and the Law - Person Numbers,
Computers and the Media - PCs hit Corporate America,
Information - Communications Policy Panels from MRI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 9 March 1984 03:04-EST
From: Steven A. Swernofsky <SASW @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Sherry Turkle's book on computing culture
To: Kling%UCI-20B @ UCI-750A
Date: 18 Feb 1984 2051-PST
From: Rob-Kling <Kling%UCI-20B%UCI-750a at csnet2>
Sherry Turkle is coming out with a book that may deal in part with
the cultures of computing worlds. It also examines questions about
how children come to see computer applications as alive, animate,
etc. It was to be called, "The Intimate Machine." . . .
Sherry Turkle's new title is ``The Second Self: The Computer and the
Human Spirit'' (Simon & Schuster, May 1984). It is excerpted in ``The
Intimate Machine (Eavesdropping on the secret lives of computers and
kids.),'' which appears in the April issue of Science 84.
If this excerpt is typical, the book should be very good indeed. The
article is very readable and informative, telling the story of several
children who encounter computer games and computer programming. It
pays particular attention to the difference between an "engineer's"
and an "artist's" viewpoint, and to the difference between a boy's and
a girl's view. Read it!
-- Steve
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 01:31:33-PST
From: David Roode <ROODE@SRI-NIC>
Subject: personal i.d. numbers
All of this discussion of personal i.d. number makes me think of the
laughable amount of non-use to which the government puts social
security numbers when used as taxpayer i.d. numbers. They apparently
do a very poor job of cross checking amounts reported by payers
against amounts declared as taxable income. It seemed ludicrous for
withholding on interest payments to be proposed as a means of applying
some tax to cheaters. Wouldn't that encourage more people to cheat?
The implication was very strong that cheaters were not going to get
tapped otherwise. I don't see how any further invasion of privacy
could be used to improve the information the government had at hand.
Yet seemingly no use is being made of the data.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 84 10:02:22 EST
From: Mark S. Day <mday@BBN-UNIX>
Subject: Computer ad - stranger than fiction
The following (condensed) ad was in TWA Ambassador for February 1984.
It presents an interesting image of a computer as the concealed weapon
of the truly macho financial analyst:
THE COMPUTERS WHIRRED ALL NIGHT. BY DAWN THE COMPANY WAS OURS.
(The following is based on a true story as told by a financial
analyst. Names and places have been changed to insure
confidentiality.)
IT WOULD BE A TOUGH FIGHT.
Takeover battles always are. We knew we were in for a grueling
negotiation with a tough, elusive quarry. So we burned the midnight
oil, doing extensive computer modeling and analysis. And when we
boarded the plane for New York, my <brand name> computer was tucked
into my briefcase.
FIRST WE GOT THE WORD FROM MAHOGANY ROW.
[The orders from financial execs.]
OUR BATTLEFIELD? THE PARK LANE HOTEL.
[Setting the scene.]
WE WERE EVENLY MATCHED -- ALMOST.
It was their senior vice-president vs. our senior vice-president.
Their corporate counsel vs. our corporate counsel. Their investment
bankers vs. our investment bankers. But that's where the match came
apart. Because their was their financial analyst vs. me and my <brand
name>. Sure they had a "portable" computer installed in their
strategy room. But they didn't have the power of a <brand name> --
the one in the briefcase right at my feet.
THE BATTLE BEGAN.
Right off, their analyst flourished a ream of printouts, demonstrating
their position was so solid they could repulse our advance. Or maybe
drive up our bid price? We replied with our own analysis, modeled on
my <brand name>. "We've been through your entire operation with a
fine-toothed comb," our chief negotiator said. "Your capital
investments have been compromised by two years of inadequate return.
The weakness has been obscured by your highly diversified portfolio,
but we've found it and analyzed the consequences. Therefore we're
forced to devalue your projected worth. And the cash part of our
offer now comes in at $200 million, not $285 million." They were
annoyed. But quickly recovered to say contemptuously, "Of course, you
can substantiate your claim."
ALL EYES FOCUSED ON THE FLAT BLACK BOX.
I had pulled out my <brand name>, placed it square on the table and
plugged it in. Their analyst said, "What's that, a computer?" Then
his boss halted him with a stern glance. Meanwhile, I raised the flat
electroluminescent screen into position, and rotated the <brand name>
so everybody on their side of the table could see the bright amber
display. First I modeled the performance of all their capital
investments. It wasn't near where it should have been. Next I broke
it out by basic industries. There was the culprit. Their forestry
investments had pulled down the entire division. I modeled the
performance without forestry, and I modeled forestry alone. The two
graphs could not have been more divergent. "If we do a regression
analysis," I said, "we can predict the effect of these investments
over the next five years." I showed them the intricate formula for
the analysis. With two keystrokes it turned into a simple graph with
an obvious trend. "Our projections show the true value of this
segment to be 30% less than the value initially presented," I said.
The amber glow from the <brand name> reflected in the glasses of their
analyst as he peered at the screen.
THE TIDE OF BATTLE HAD TURNED.
[The ability of the computer to plug into the Dow Jones news service
further disconcerts the bad guys, and leaves our hero feeling
momentarily sorry for his counterpart.]
THE COMPUTERS WHIRRED ALL NIGHT.
The rest of that day and all that night the computers whirred. While
they crunched the numbers on their under-powered portable, I put
together ten more models covering every angle, every stratagem, every
possible avenue of escape. I used the <brand name> to access our
corporate computers to capture the very latest data. I produced
graphs to illustrate our analysis. And I wrote a summary document
substantiating our position. As dawn approached, I knew we had them
where we wanted them.
WE CLOSED THE DEAL.
My boss told me that just one of the models I created on my <brand
name> computer saved the company $85 million. Their analyst came over
and asked me about that black box in my briefcase. I told him it was
just another business tool.
"More like a concealed weapon," he said. I didn't reply. You never
talk about the edge you have over someone else.
--Mark Day
ARPA: mday@BBN-UNIX
UUCP: ..!ihnp4!decvax!bbncca!mday
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 84 07:49 EST
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA
Massachusetts Research
Institute Program on
of Technology Communications
Policy
THE
CENTRAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION
(BELL COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH)
THURSDAY, APR. 5, 1984
MARLAR LOUNGE, 4 - 6 PM
BUILDING 37-252, MIT
70 VASSAR ST., CAMBRIDGE
ROCCO MORANO, BELL COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH
ERWIN DORROS, BELL COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH
MANLEY IRWIN, UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
A "central services organization" for the Bell Operating
Companies (BOCS) was mandated in the AT&T Consent Decree as a "point
of contact" for national security and emergency preparedness
coordination and planning. What has been created is a 10000 employee
organization, Bell Communications Research, Inc. -- primarily drawn
from Bell Labs -- providing research, product evaluation, standards
coordination, and a host of other services to the BOCS.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 84 07:47 EST
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA
Massachusetts Research
Institute Program on
of Technology Communications Policy
THE EFFECT OF REPRODUCTION
TECHNOLOGIES ON
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THURSDAY, MAR. 22, 1984
MARLAR LOUNGE, 4 - 6 PM
BUILDING 37-252
70 VASSAR ST. CAMBRIDGE
STANLEY BESEN, THE RAND CORPORATION
CAROL RISHER, ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PUBLISHERS
MARIO BAEZA, DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON/HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
New reproduction technologies -- photocopiers, videocassette
recorders, computers -- threaten copyright owners with loss of control
over their product. But it is difficult to calculate actual or
potential losses, or to determine whether these losses actually impair
the incentive to create intellectual property. Regulatory solutions,
such as redistribution of compulsory license fees on copying equipment
and materials, have been proposed but involve additional costs and
raise difficult administrative and policy problems. Dr. Besen is
finishing an NSF-funded project that develops economic models for the
problem of "home" copying and analyzes the production, distribution,
and pricing policies of firms that face the problem..
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************