jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (11/19/88)
I received a msg via email that I should not place political comments
in this newsgroup. I tried to reply to her via email, but was
unable to, so let me do so here, please.
Whether a computer network is provided by voluntaristic or
coercive means is a very important question in the future of
computing, so it should, indeed, be addressed here.
It has the following sub-questions:
1. Who should/will pay for such a good/service -- users or
taxpayers?
2. Who should/will control it -- users or politicians/bureaucrats?
3. Will its purpose be the advancement of computer science and
improvement of the general Human condition -- or the
enhancement/aggrandizement of political empires?
I think these are things we should consider, as the answers will
determine the direction of a major aspect of computing's future.
Jeff Daiell
(opinions my own)
--
Fiat Justitia, Ruat Caelum jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (11/29/88)
In article <2272@ficc.uu.net>, jeffd@ficc.uu.net (Jeff Daiell) writes: > unable to, so let me do so here, please. > > Whether a computer network is provided by voluntaristic or > coercive means is a very important question in the future of > computing, so it should, indeed, be addressed here. > > It has the following sub-questions: > > 1. Who should/will pay for such a good/service -- users or > taxpayers? > > 2. Who should/will control it -- users or politicians/bureaucrats? > > 3. Will its purpose be the advancement of computer science and > improvement of the general Human condition -- or the > enhancement/aggrandizement of political empires? > (1) Has been explored pretty well. Unfortunately, human rights advocates have still not been abled to sway those who feel that wanting something entitles them to force others to pay for it. But (2) hasn't been dealt with enough. Do we really want to hand over control of something that's pretty significant now, and likely to be more significant as time goes on, to the Ed Meeses, Bert Lances, Dan Quayles of the world? There are significant 1st Amendment and 4th Amendment issues here that should be addressed. Government at all levels taps phone calls, and Uncle Sam inteferes with the mails -- do we want analogous antics going on with a computer network? Item (3) has not been dealt with at all, but is also quite vital. Do we want to hand over what could be a great facilitator of Human advancement over to those whose main goal would be re-election, or building political fiefdoms? I'd like to read some more comments on (2) and (3), please. Jeff Daiell (opinions my own, until the IRS confiscates them) -- "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good ... Oh, Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood!" -- The Animals