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the first ten were mistakes, and should have been rescinded long ago.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]