taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (06/18/86)
Computers and Society Digest, Number 3
Friday, November 1st 1985
Topics of discussion in this issue...
More News: The European EUREKA Consortium
Computers and the Law (an anecdote)
Retort to Clarise Samuels
Response to "The Marketing of Computers"
The Computerization of Sweden
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 85 23:34:47 MDT
From: hpcnou!dat (Dave Taylor)
Subject: More News: The European EUREKA Consortium
"Eureka, Western Europe's program to close a perceived technology
gap with the U.S. and Japan, is off to a rocky start. Betting in European
capitals is that the drive will remain in trouble for quite some time.
"The French government proposed the scheme last April. It is intended
to be a civilian, multiproject program, with 18 nations out to stimulate
Continentwide cooperation, block a brain drain to U.S.-backed research.
"Eureka would stress the most advanced fields -- certain computer chips,
artificial intelligence, robotics, lasers, telecommunications. However,
there are no firm cost estimates, no agreement on who should do what.
"Further, Tory-lead Britain favors minimal government role. Socialist-
led France wants Eureka to be state funded -- and has pledged 115 million
dollars for 1986. Most of the 16 other countries tend to side with
Paris. They maintain that private industry is unlikely to take part in
such a high-risk venture if governments merely sit on the sidelines.
"A meeting in London on October 14 did little to patch this up.
The 18 nations will try again at Hanover, West Germany, on November
5-6, when some specific projects may be chosen to be the core of Eureka."
--- US News and World Report, Oct 28, page 35
What I find most interesting about this is that it insinuates that
high-technology is exempt from the normal world trade system - that of
certain products being from certain countries and so on.
The relevence to the group is the underlying question of "Why do
the European countries that are taking part feel so threatened by the
advancement of technology in the West and Far East?"
It seems that, again, computers (and related areas) are 'special'
somehow and change all the rules...it's the mystery of information that
seems to hold the key - the thought that if you don't catch up with your
competitors (in whatever area, be it marketing, construction, or even war)
you're doomed.
On the other hand, I guess people have always been 'Consumers' at
heart - always thirsting for the newest and greatest...
More idle thoughts.
--- Dave Taylor
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 27 Oct 1985 18:56:43-PST
From: Andy Mermell, CSSE DSS, ZK1-2/C07 381-1403
Subject: Computers and the Law (an anecdote)
>From "Mass High Tech" Oct. 14, 1985
After being stopped for a traffic violation, a New Jersey woman was
arrested, strip searched and jailed on the basis of faulty information
fed into a national Crime Information Center Computer. Elaine Smith
of Dover, NJ was held for eight days in the Morris County jail after a
check with the NCIC indicated a woman with the same name and birth
date was wanted in Texas for welfare fraud, said Smith's lawyer. The
target of the Texas search had a different middle name, social
security number and physical description from that of the New Jersey
Smith, but none of that information was included in the center's
records.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 85 16:00:39 mst
From: ihnp4!terak!sohail (Sohail M. Hussain)
Subject: Retort to Clarise Samuels
Whoa! Clarise Samuels stomped all over my comment, "Unused information
is indistinguishable from useless information." claiming that this was
"not only erroneous, but...almost dangerous."
But my comment was taken entirely out of context. That comment was
in response to the question of whether society might split into the
"information rich" and "information poor" as a result of computers.
It had nothing to do with whether people should learn "the history
of Western civilization, of culture and the humanities..." I thought
this was the Computers and Society mailing list, not the Culture and
Society list.
My point was simply that I believe that people with computer access will
not have a great "information advantage" over others, because they will
not have as many opportunities to actually use the information that they
have gathered.
And now a specific rebuttal... Clarise Samuels wrote,
In conclusion, unused "information," or as I would prefer to call it
when relating it to the mind, unused knowledge, is never entirely
unused, and can never be fully rendered useless.
To which I say, the term isn't "unused knowledge", it's "trivia". The
bookstores are loaded with books full of the stuff. Most information is
of little value when it's fresh; and of no value when it's stale.
Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {calcom1,savax,seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!terak!doug
------------------------------
From: hplabs!aurora!eugene (Eugene miya)
Date: 28 Oct 1985 2111-PST (Monday)
Subject: Response to "The Marketing of Computers"
> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 85 12:22:58 est
> From: Wombat <hplabs!ihnp4!pur-ee!pucc-j!rsk>
> Subject: The Marketing of Computers
>
> Many of the commercials and advertisements seem to be pushing the point
> of view that *everyone* needs a computer...witness the plethora of ads
> that attempt to convince parents that without his/her very own pc, their
> child will be a failure in school...or the ads that try to convince
> the average businessperson that they must have a computer in order to
> keep up with their competition.
>
> Now, these ads aren't entirely unreasonable; but I think that manufacturers
> should be extremely careful about pushing this line as a sales pitch; I think
> it's close to being unethical. Why? Simply because there are people out
> there who have no business being anywhere *near* a computer;
>
> Are we (the computer/software industry) in danger of alienating the market
> base for our products by pushing them too soon, too quickly, at a public
> that's (to some degree) still afraid of them?
>
> Rich Kulawiec, Purdue University Computing Center
> rsk@pur-ee.uucp rsk@purdue.uucp rsk@purdue-asc.arpa
First, I highly agree with you in principle. There are people who should
not be let near machines. But, like many technologists in thise field,
there is a sneaking suspicion that this talk about "computer literacy"
or other terminology may have a grain of truth, if only a grain.
My illustration of this "knowledge as power" viewpoint came unintentionally
about 10 years ago when I was an undergrad as a president on a council of
clubs regarding budgetary matters [let me say I hate politics at this point].
There were 20 clubs which were fighting over a pot of money, some with
outlandish requests. My request was basically a doubling of a smaller
budget (400->800), but some request was 10x's existing budget. Of the
twenty Club Presients and the three faculty members, I was the only hard
science major, and the first person to ever bring a calculator to this
meeting [I borrowed one from my work-study position as a stat analyst
in the psychology dept; I majored in math]. Since, I was able to
total numbers faster than any of the other people, I wield quite a bit
of power. It was possible to perform all types of "analysis" (bad as
well as good) in a short period of time. One argument was based
on a funds per membership size basis. In short, my organization was the
only one of two to get budget increases (50%). In two later years,
lesser calculators appeared, but I suspect this are different now with
all undergrads using calculators.
I wish it were possible to convey the kind of power that one has in a meeting
like that. The calculator was only a tool, but it was an extremely
powerful tool. Certainly, more "evil" forces could turn such power
to bad uses. While computers are being oversold, we must be careful
not to undersell them, too. I, too, dislike those ads.
>From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
{hplabs,hao,dual,ihnp4,vortex}!ames!aurora!eugene
@ames-vmsb.ARPA:emiya@jup.DECNET
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 85 18:05:35 est
From: hplabs!ihnp4!uvacs!hsd (Harry S. Delugach)
Subject: The Computerization of Sweden
In regard to Dave Williams article of the computerization of Sweden:
No matter what laws exist to protect my personal records in various
data bases, I am all-too-confident (unfortunately) that the Reagan
administration, which has repeatedly encouraged its offices to
disobey or "ignore" (is there a difference?) laws, will allow its bureaucrats
to get access to them anyway. For every legal guarantee, there will be someone
to justify "unofficial" peeking, particularly if the information never appears
as evidence in court. For every program which is supposed to ensure privacy,
it will be possible for a malfunction (intentional or otherwise) to breach
privacy, perhaps without leaving a trace. The key, as Williams so rightly
points out, is the PROGRAMMER's ethics.
Programmers are often subjected to pressure from management to
circumvent normal software or administrative procedures. Sometimes, they take
it as a technical challenge -- to prove they can do something that's supposed
to be impossible. In many cases, I don't think programmers possess the legal
knowledge to decide what is ethical.
Managers of data bases, too, often feel that issues of privacy and fairness
are irritants to be ignored except by the front office. They have a "job to do",
and use whatever means they have to accomplish it.
It all comes down to the beliefs of individual programmers. Getting every
person in a large organization to adhere to the law is not a new problem, but
when it involves technical problems that only a few people can solve, it
behooves those few to become well-versed on their ethical responsibilities.
If they refuse to give their expertise, then managers may have to obey the law,
whether they want to or not.
-----------------------------------
To have your item included in this digest, please mail it to any
of the addresses; ihnp4!hpfcla!d_taylor, {ucbvax} !hplabs!hpcnof!dat or
hpcnof!dat@HPLABS.CSNET. You can also simply respond to this mailing.
-----------------------------------
End of Computers and Society Digest
-----------------------------------