arms-d@ucbvax.ARPA (11/06/84)
From: Moderator <ARMS-D@MIT-MC.ARPA> Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 2 : Issue 71 Today's Topics: Consciousness game (4 msgs) Social Impacts of Computing: Graduate Study at UC-Irvine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 November 1984 14:50-EST From: Oded Anoaf Feingold <OAF @ MIT-MC> Subject: bhlunhtness To: sde @ MITRE-BEDFORD cc: ARMS-D @ MIT-MC, ARMS-DISCUSSION @ MIT-MC There's another clause in the constitution about freedom of speech (and press). Of course, that's just an amendment, and we know that nine of the first ten were mistakes, and should have been rescinded long ago. Oded PS: I speak from imperfect memory fo the "conscious" game, and some unwillingness to reread it lest I be tempted to temper my flame. But may I mention in passing that the American public has (at least theoretically) learned to sift the "information" it receives. People in more information--controlled societies do not, and believe in and react to fairly outlandish propositions (by our standards.) Hence the sword cuts both ways. ------------------------------ Date: 3 Nov 1984 1200-PST From: Rob-Kling <Kling%UCI-20B@UCI-750a> Subject: Social Impacts of Computing: Graduate Study at UC-Irvine To: arms-d@MIT-MC CORPS ------- Graduate Education in Computing, Organizations, Policy, and Society at the University of California, Irvine This graduate concentration at the University of California, Irvine provides an opportunity for scholars and students to investigate the social dimensions of computerization in a setting which supports reflective and sustained inquiry. The primary educational opportunities are PhD concentrations in the Department of Information and Computer Science (ICS) and MS and PhD concentrations in the Graduate School of Management (GSM). Students in each concentration can specialize in studying the social dimensions of computing. The faculty at Irvine have been active in this area, with many interdisciplinary projects, since the early 1970's. The faculty and students in the CORPS have approached them with methods drawn from the social sciences. The CORPS concentration focuses upon four related areas of inquiry: 1. Examining the social consequences of different kinds of computerization on social life in organizations and in the larger society. 2. Examining the social dimensions of the work and organizational worlds in which computer technologies are developed, marketed, disseminated, deployed, and sustained. 3. Evaluating the effectiveness of strategies for managing the deployment and use of computer-based technologies. 4. Evaluating and proposing public policies which facilitate the development and use of computing in pro-social ways. Studies of these questions have focussed on complex information systems, computer-based modelling, decision-support systems, the myriad forms of office automation, electronic funds transfer systems, expert systems, instructional computing, personal computers, automated command and control systems, and computing at home. The questions vary from study to study. They have included questions about the effectiveness of these technologies, effective ways to manage them, the social choices that they open or close off, the kind of social and cultural life that develops around them, their political consequences, and their social carrying costs. CORPS studies at Irvine have a distinctive orientation - (i) in focussing on both public and private sectors, (ii) in examining computerization in public life as well as within organizations, (iii) by examining advanced and common computer-based technologies "in vivo" in ordinary settings, and (iv) by employing analytical methods drawn from the social sciences. Organizational Arrangements and Admissions for CORPS The CORPS concentration is a special track within the normal graduate degree programs of ICS and GSM. Admission requirements for this concentration are the same as for students who apply for a PhD in ICS or an MS or PhD in GSM. Students with varying backgrounds are encouraged to apply for the PhD programs if they show strong research promise. The seven primary faculty in the CORPS concentration hold appointments in the Department of Information and Computer Science and the Graduate School of Management. Additional faculty in the School of Social Sciences, and the program on Social Ecology, have collaborated in research or have taught key courses for CORPS students. Research is administered through an interdisciplinary research institute at UCI which is part of the Graduate Division, the Public Policy Research Organization. Students who wish additional information about the CORPS concentration should write to: Professor Rob Kling (Kling@uci) Department of Information and Computer Science University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5955 or 856-7403 or to: Professor Kenneth Kraemer (Kraemer@uci) Graduate School of Management University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5246 ------------------------------ Date: 4-Nov-84 20:09 PST From: Kirk Kelley <KIRK.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA> Subject: Re: the Conscious game To: sde@Mitre-Bedford Cc: ARMS-D@MIT-MC.ARPA From: sde@Mitre-Bedford Brilliant satire of a leftist mind at work. ... what has been suggested is the deliberate creation of a variety of information disease ... psychological warfare. If I wanted to be really blunt, which I do, I therefore would remark that there is a clause in the U.S. constitution about 'levying war' against the U.S. First of all, thanks for your complement on my satirical abilities (though I must concede they pale next to yours :-). Secondly, you seem to agree that playing the Conscious game would reduce a culture's motivation to sustain the military-industrial complex and the arms race. Your complaint seems to be based on the assumption that the most viable way of life for a free culture (coevolving with centrally controlled censoring cultures) is via its military industrial complex and the arms race. This is my fault for not making it clear that playing the Conscious game would never reduce a culture's need for the military-industrial complex and the arms race without first providing a more viable way of life for the culture. I believe this eliminates the grounds for your complaint. I see no argument here anyway against the Conscious game per se. Indeed, I think the Conscious game would make an ideal environment in which to present your case against all the other proposals that claim to increase our viability. As a collaborated simulation of its own lifetime that quickly becomes concerned with the viability of its environment, the Conscious game creates a form of augmented viability consciousness. I'm sure you do not wish to claim that free cultures with an augmented viability consciousness would be less viable than unaugmented centrally controlled censoring cultures. If the Conscious game simulated centrally controlled censoring cultures (like the DoD?) as more viable than free cultures, I would be among the most surprised and would immediately join in looking for flaws in the model. A more interesting question is the notion expressed by Crummer that there is no technological solution to the arms race. If a solution requires a change in our attitudes and habits, the allegorical adventures spun from the Conscious game would be without a doubt the most effective medium of learning those changes. As scientists and engineers in the throws of creating technologies, we have a responsibility to see at least that our efforts increase our viability rather than decrease it. In as much as playing the Conscious game (and hence developing that technology) would help us evaluate our efforts and learn about potentially more viable alternatives, it is not only professionally irresponsible but down right suicidal not to play. Now, if only the proponents of these arguments would identify mathematically the basic relationships that could implement their proposals in the Conscious model ... -- kirk ------------------------------ Date: 5-Nov-84 21:31 PST From: Kirk Kelley <KIRK.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA> Subject: Re: The Conscious game To: arms-d@mit-mc From a comment: To play, people would need to have computers and a knowledge of what they're doing. Both items are in short supply. To play seriously, they would need to neglect major parts of their present lives. What chance does a game have to pull people that hard? Define fun! Sounds just silly and pointless to me. What does Joe Blow care how long a program lives? Good points. I'm sorry they were not properly addressed before. I could detail some design examples, but I'll just paint a general picture. In one Conscious model, the Conscious game teaches players how to do modeling and simulation using whatever environments implement it. Players are compensated every time another player uses something they contributed. Thus it becomes a vocation for many not unlike the jobs for programmers that have grown up around the personal computer technology. Each so employed individual does what ever they can to make sure that as many people as possible have the necessary technology to play. Even if it means giving every grade school in the third world several flat Macs and beginning playing credits sort of like blade and film manufacturors give away razors and cameras. Especially if simulations of such behavior in the Conscious game result in higher scores. I do not expect most uses of the resulting on-line service economy technology would be centered around the conscious game. Nonetheless, I'm sure you'll agree that many silly and pointless activities are enjoyable for their own sake (and hence, fun). Take MacPaint for example. Or visit any video arcade. Or play a few adventures from Infocom. Imagine allegories for the Conscious game at least as creative as any of these. -- kirk ------------------------------ [End of ARMS-D Digest]