The Politics of Technology

airrage writes "An interesting Washington Post article today, concerning technology's voice on Capital Hill, talks about how the high-tech sector is no longer the belle of the congressional ball. Apparently, circa 2000, politicos were simply tripping over themselves to be seen as pro-technology. Currently, it's much harder to get congressional leaders to embrace pro-technology initiatives. Seems like technology in general is trending towards more regulation as the industry is seen as staid as railroads, coal, or shipping."

Comments

Technology is Politics

[locarecords.com]

I think it is important that technologists realise the importance of politics to technology. The centres of power cannot simply be ignored and difficult questions about where technology is leading us and where we want it to lead us need to be addressed particularly by those who understand the technology.

This is especially crucial when politicians start to introduce crazy new laws (DMCA anyone?) without any deeper understanding of the implications.

People claiming that Open Source must remain apolitical and neutral are naive. To address this subject we are running an open debate on technology and politics on our website digitalagora.com and would welcome your comments and debate.

More regulated?

[RebelTycoon]

"Seems like technology in general is trending towards more regulation as the industry is seen as staid as railroads, coal, or shipping."

If anything its the opposite. Look at how they dealt with Microsoft. Personally I would welcome a little more regulation. It seems that we in the technology sector seem to like the Wild Wild West and the Internet Gold Rush.

Sure, shit laws like the DMCA get passed, but that's not regulating the technology industry as much as it is the Consumers of the technology. The DMCA actually give more power / less regulation to technologies companies at the expense of the consumers.

Bush campaign dirty tricks: Gore told the truth.

[maynard]

Here's a nice summary of the "Gore invented the Internet" bullshit. Note that Gore claimed to have been directly involved in providing NSF funding for ARPANET. This, in fact, he did. More importantly, he NEVER claimed to have invented the technology and engineering behind the Internet. Here's what Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf have to say on the matter. Note that they ARE principal engineers of the original ARPANET. Essentially, they back up Gore and his involvement in providing the necessary funds to keep the ARPANET, and then the Internet alive during tough financial and budgetary times.

You are repeating a political dirty trick the Republican's used to discredit Gore during the 2000 election. That it was completely false and a total misrepresentation of Gore's words and intent didn't matter to Bush and his campaign staff. That people still repeat the slander as though it was God's truth shows how effective negative advertising and media manipulation really is. I note finally that I dod NOT vote for Gore, and was never a Gore supporter. And I won't vote for him in 2004. But that doesn't mean I think it's acceptable to let this untruthful meme perpetuate without refutation.

Cheers,
--Maynard

Re:Jobs

[spectecjr]

Then why are US companies keeping there H1B's while laying of US citizens?

They're not all doing that. A lot of H1Bs are being laid off. And guess what? Most recruiters won't even look at people with an H1B these days -- and really haven't since mid-1999 when the first strains of the economy crashing started to be heard.

And guess what? If you're running a company intelligently, you don't always cut for the bottom line. You sometimes cut away the lowest-producing people instead.

And those people aren't always H1B workers.

Simon

Vint Cerf says Gore was 'instrumental' too.

[maynard]

There are a thousand people more deserving to proclaim they "took the initiative in creating the Internet". Sure Al may take credit in helping to promote it, but his statement was way too broad and arrogant.

Those "thousand people" weren't in congress promoting and voting on NSF funding for the net, now were they? While a congressman in the House of Representatives from 1976 to 1984, and while in the Senate from 1984 to 1992, he was one of the principal NSF fundraisers for the APRANET project. It's the truth, as much as some folks would like to overlook that fact. Oftentimes he was among the only members of congress who saw the potential of the net once computing became ubiquitous. Again, I point readers (and you) to what Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf have to say on the matter. Al Gore has this to say on the subject as well. He plainly makes clear that he never involved himself in deep technical and engineering aspects of the ARPANET project.

Folks may not like the facts of his involvement, especially considering how contentious this issue has been after the factual misrepresentations by operatives from the Republican party and the press during the 2000 election. However, facts are facts and those misrepresentations and lies don't take away the real good that Gore did in promoting the 'net during almost fifteen years in congress, often in tough financial times. According to Kahn and Cerf, Gore actually was instrumental in providing the necessary funding to keep development alive from the late seventies on through to the early nineties, after which it took off on it's own.

Again, I repeat that I am not a fan of Gore, didn't vote for him in 2000, and would not vote for him if given the chance in 2004. That doesn't make the slander that he misrepresented his involvement in funding the development of the net any less worthy of refutation.

Cheers,
--Maynard

Re:Not a troll, some truth in the statement

[sfwriter]

"...his statement was way too broad and arrogant. "

So here is the greatest political champion technology has ever had on capitol hill, and now that he is gone, we're having a discussion about the lack of a "technology" voice on the hill.

Maybe his statement wasn't as broad or arrogant as you might think... Without Gore, the Internet would have remained an isolated academic afterthought, and all those real productivity gains in the economy that stem from the Internet wouldn't exist.

Did you ever read the interviews with him about technology?

Did you hear about his NASA satellite?

This man is brilliant, broad minded and far thinking.

Arrogance is telling the American people they don't have a right to know who you meet with when deciding policy or claiming you "signed a patient's bill of rights in Texas," when you did no such thing. Actually, that last one is lying, which even you admit Gore didn't do.

-Sandy