Ronda Hauben on 6 Jan 2001 19:05:27 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Tech CEO's advise New Administration or need for broader ranging advice |
Following is something I sent to Dave Farber's IP list about the interesting comment he made about the need to provide adequate education so that there can be the needed contributions by those with more technical understanding to the political and policy process. Dave Farber wrote: >Subject: IP: TECH GURUS EDUCATE BUSH.: What's New for Jan 05, 2001 >Based on my experience in DC, what we need is an investment in the >University's Law schools to create a technically aware set of politicians >and an investment in Engineering Schools to create a policy and politically >aware set of technicians :-) djf I want to propose that there is also an investment needed in Engineering Schools and Law Schools so that they raise the social issues that one needs to understand to deal with policy and political issues connected with the new computer and networking technology that has been developed since WWII. Quoting: >>5. TECH GURUS EDUCATE BUSH. Bush met with tech-sector CEO's this >>week for policy advice, and got a unanimous answer: we need more >>investment in K-12 science and math, to create a technically >>educated workforce. Bush proclaimed the issue a priority. Perhaps a US President needs to meet with more than just tech-sector CEO's for policy advice. This is a time of great change and it would seem a President of a diverse country like the US needs broad ranging information to understand how to meet the challenges of such changing times. Donald Price in his book "Government and Science" describes the need for scientific and technical advisors to government who will provide the broadest possible range of information and advice. I have been reading some articles written in the 1970's by J.C.R. Licklider urging that there is a need for support for socio-technical pioneers to contribute to government policy processes. Also I have just read some of "Giant Brains" by Edmund C. Berkeley who was instrumental in forming the ACM. Berkeley's book provides important technical descriptions of early computers circa 1949. And he provides some discussion of the kind of social oversight and leadership needed from government and society for computers to be developed in a socially beneficial way. A few years ago I took an engineering course that surveyed the social problems and issues that engineers need to concern themselves with. It was a course in civil engineering but it included a broad sweep of the kind of regulatory and other government activity that has been needed over a long period of time for the engineer to be able to have the support needed to design safe and socially beneficial technology. Project MAC at MIT, the first Center of Excellence set up by Licklider after he went to ARPA in 1962, included social concerns among the concerns that students there explored. Also Licklider advocated support for students who wanted to consider the good as well as problemmatic potential impact of the computer and networking technology. My most recent research, however, has been about the multidisciplinary community that Licklider was part of in the 1940's through the 1960's when he first went to ARPA to form the Information Processing Techniques Office. This community investigated the nature of natural and artificial feedback control mechanisms. In this community were researchers who were modeling the human capacity to adapt and learn based on knowledge about both the human brain and the newly developed machine servo-mechanisms. An important part of the ability to adapt and learn of human systems has to do with regulatory mechanisms that provide a stability so that learning and adaptation can be embraced to provide for the needed changes to meet the needs of a changing environment. When Licklider went to ARPA to create IPTO in 1962, he brought with him the experience of this community, and added the ability to create new tools and the possibility of a human-computer partnership to provide society with the capability of the computer and the human interacting online. It was Licklider's hope that the human-computer interactive and collaboratory partnership could indeed provide for the needed problem solving ability a varying and changing environment requires. This is perhaps a broader perspective than seems to be considered in policy circles in general in the US. That is why I am suggesting that there is a need to provide a broad socio-technical education for students and and other citizens so they can encourage their government to make socially beneficial decisions regarding technology. Its good to see you are encouraging the consideration of such challenges. Ronda ronda@panix.com http://www.ais.org/~ronda http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ P.S. I am working on a draft paper about the role of the post WWII interdisciplinary research community in creating a visionary perspective for early computer science developments. I would be glad to send a copy to those interested for their comments when it is done. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net