efrethei@afit.af.mil (Erik J Fretheim) (02/25/91)
Larry Hunter writes: > With respect to several recent claims about the difficulty of doing > advanced CS research in institutions unsupported by the military, e.g: > I would like to suggest that biomedical computing offers a wide > variety of career paths in industry, government and academia that > involve research, design and engineering of state of the art computer > systems uninvolved with the military...I chose to pursue my machine > learning research in a biomedical environment to avoid contributing my > expertise to the military industrial complex, at some personal financial > sacrifice. > In my view, the primary priviledge of not being oppressed is the > ability to choose among the people and interests I serve. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you too are serving in the military- industrial complex. The more goodies you develop to patch people back together, the quicker they can be put back on the lines to collect more holes for you to patch. After all, why do you think the military funds and supports so much medical research, to include supporting or working with all of the institutions you mentioned. The only way, (and I repeat only) way to work against war is to alleviate those social conditions which place people in the condition where they feel they have nothing to lose by fighting. As for the rest of us we are merely making the cost threshold high enough to give the politicians and others to complete this task. After all we don't want to introduce a common standard of living by lowering everyone to the lowest common denominator. It would be much preferable to raise everyone to some common high level, even if a few remain at a yet higher level still. Standard disclaimer emphasized. These are my personal remarks. Erik J Fretheim
smith@SCTC.COM (Rick Smith) (02/26/91)
Erik J Fretheim writes: > The only way, (and I repeat only) way to work against war is to > alleviate those social conditions which place people in the condition > where they feel they have nothing to lose by fighting. Right on! And the same is true for crime. However, I don't propose we scrap all police forces and rely on everyone's social consciousness to maintain civic peace and safety. There is an analogy to this concerning the place of the military (and it is independent of the issue of what *ours* of the Coalition are up to at this exact moment). But then this is getting away from comp.society. To get back to the opening comment, can computer technology help? Do databases help? Improved communication? Computer aided education? Or are they all smoke we throw up to avoid confronting the real, personal, social problems that require us to think, act, and *change*? Rick
thom@dewey.soe.Berkeley.EDU (Thom Gillespie) (02/27/91)
Rick Smith writes: > To get back to the opening comment, can computer technology help? > Do databases help? Improved communication? Computer aided education? > Or are they all smoke we throw up to avoid confronting the real, > personal, social problems that require us to think, act, and *change*? I don't know if they are 'all smoke we throw up to avoid confronting the real, personal, social problems that require us to think, act, change" but there is a definite distancing effect of technology on how we relate to suffering. The best example being the bombing and destruction of Iraq compared to the reported destruction of Kuwait. When we talk about Kuwait, we talk about violation, rape, murder. When we talk about the destruction of Iraq we talk about precision, collateral damage, and surgical strikes -- and more importantly we are 'shown' the precision of our 'smart' bombs flying down air shafts. McLuhan contended that technology extends our senses. The car extended movement, TV sight, radio hearing, etc. He also contended that electricity extended our nerve endings to cover the world. He may have been right, but I'm not sure he realized that ultimately it would 'over-extend' our senses so now while we can see from the stars we can't feel any longer. We seem to confuse this knowing and seeing with feeling and understanding. Extending past this current incarnation -- ironic wording -- of computer technology to virtual realities. Will we feel more or less because of the technology? Frustrated and senseless Thom Gillespie
rob.bbs@shark.cs.fau.edu (Robert Rittenhouse) (03/05/91)
Thom Gillespie writes: > there is a definite distancing effect of technology on how we relate > to suffering. The best example being the bombing and destruction of > Iraq compared to the reported destruction of Kuwait. When we talk about > Kuwait, we talk about violation, rape, murder. When we talk about the > destruction of Iraq we talk about precision, collateral damage, and > surgical strikes -- and more importantly we are 'shown' the precision of > our 'smart' bombs flying down air shafts. I agree on the potential distancing effects of technology but I think what we're looking at in talking about atrocities in Kuwait and "collateral damage" in Iraq is the result of who "we" are--not the technology. Technology does have a real effect on the performer of the deed--feels a lot different to drop bombs from a plane than it does to knife someone. The interested reader is also directed to Shoshannah Zuboff's claims that computer technology makes work more abstract (Zuboff, Shoshannah "New Worlds of Computer-Mediated Work" _Harvard Business Review_, 60(5) September-October 1982). New technology actually brings a sense of the reality of war closer to the armchair types--witness discussion of Vietnam as television war and military censorship in the current conflict. Rob Rittenhouse
thom@garnet.berkeley.edu (Thom Gillespie) (03/06/91)
Robert Rittenhouse writes: > New technology actually brings a sense of the reality of war closer to > the armchair types--witness discussion of Vietnam as television war and > military censorship in the current conflict. Rob, the Vietnam war went on for years in 'my' living room thanks to technology. I'd contend that the war ended when there were no more ways out of the war for the middle class and the middle class body bags started to come home en mass. Without the body bags, the Vietnam War was entertainment for a society which had a serious media habit. Current technology has made videos of missiles that fly down airshafts and chase civilians across bridges .. very, very entertaining. Remember the luckiest man in Iraq? Mario almost got 'em. I did witness Vietnam as television and I just witnessed the Gulf War as Nintendo. Maybe the next war will be a simulation. Thom