The "Techie" Vote?

Ironica writes "This Los Angeles Times article discusses a compelling trend: techies are making their collective voice heard in politics. Quote from the article: "After years as political agnostics, the programmers and engineers who orchestrated the technological revolution of the 1990s are trying to reboot government...They have money, earned during the boom. They have time, found since the bust. And they are using their technological savvy to recruit even casual Internet users to their causes." Perhaps instead of "boxers or briefs," our next presidential candidate will have to answer "POP3 or IMAP?""

Comments

Makes me feel important

[henbane]

Nothing like being patronised by the mainstream media to make people feel relevant.

Boxers/IMAP

[Trigun]

This is not a big news story. The internet has given everyone a voice, but those who know how to speak are genreally understood more readily.

So we have this huge inter-connected network which spans the globe, now what do we do with it?

Hey! Let's talk to each other!

About what?

Politics...

Re:Boxers/IMAP

[milosoftware]

So we have this huge inter-connected network which spans the globe, now what do we do with it?

We could save the environment, we could find a cure for cancer, we could ...

NO! Let's use it to play games!

(free after an ancient 3DFx commercial...)

Age is the key

[janfarrell]

As any large and economically important collective, "Techies" have an influence in politics. As their experience, wealth, and age grows, so does their influence and interest in politics. Those important in Techie industry in the 1990s are now reaching an age where politics becomes atractive.

True, but...

[tds67]

...discusses a compelling trend: techies are making their collective voice heard in politics.

Yes, a little bit here, a little bit there, perhaps. Most techies don't talk directly about politics--they speak in code. Most have the drive to get involved, but when it comes right down to it, they act like mice. But they do monitor current trends, though. And when politicians make them angry, it does get filed in their memory, which is a key point to make here. Political shenanigans are a source of frustration for techies as well. Maybe it's time for techies to compile a list of good candidates that would be compatible with their viewpoints.

As a registered voter

[malus]

I'm going to be helping this former IT geek with his campaign:

http://www.EmmonsForCongress.com:81

this guy spent 18 years in the biz, only to have to train his 'less expensive' replacements.

I'm sure I'll be in the same boat sooner than later, however, I refuse train anyone. If upper-manglement wants to replace me with some cheap labor, THEY can figure my code out.

As /. has clearly shown

[sielwolf]

The tech community is a fractious bunch and thus completely useless as a political group. Why? Because "Speciality in IT" != Any political agenda. The camps of liberal, conservative, and libertarian thinking are wide and diverse. Hell, look at any thread on the RIAA. Probably the only platform all tech folks are for is rational copyright law (i.e. showing SCO who's the daddy). But other than that, there is no cohesion.

There's a reason why police unions, the AFL-CIO, and the Christian Right are all strong forces: they have a complete package of beliefs that they can get a large body of voters to agree on. Religion? Government? Taxes? The tech community could never get such a gestalt.

I think it is one of the great tech-urban legends that IT is a uniformly liberal RMS-style social group or ever was.

Re:As /. has clearly shown

[jellomizer]

That is a good point. I found their political directions they lean are just as diverse as the field they work in. As I work in the commercial industry in a small business, I tend to be more conservative and lean to the right, because the conservative method is best for my personal economy. While other tech who work for education or government or other Non-Profit Organization tend to lean more to the Left because that side helps their personal economy. IT is a diverse field and there are people working with IT in all areas work so we will naturally be as diverse as everyone else. But the fact that we are being more politically active is a good thing. It make sure the elected government officials listen to our ideas and try to appeal to us, because although we are diverse we have a lot of shared ideas that the politions should try to appeal. So if we all become active it would be us and the elderly.

Re:As /. has clearly shown

[Liquorman]

I am not sure about the age range of the supposed geek vote, but I would put the upper limit higher by at least 10 years. (Don't discount us old geeks!) I believe that you are correct in general that it skews slightly young.

I also agree that many pols pay less attention to the younger demographic. However, this is at their own expense. Bill Clinton played to this demographic (MTV/Arsenio appearences) and they in large part supported him and helped him win two elections.

I also agree that much of the general population see geeks as, at best, smart weirdos; to be tolerated for their techie ability. This does not bode very well for support of a "geek agenda", if indeed there even is such a thing.

I think that the real story is the ability of technology to allow casual computer users the oportunity to have a voice, regardless of their political leanings. I have many non-geek friends who respect the internet as a tool for grass-roots sharing of ideology and a way to get many points of view that are outside of the corporate side of politics. This may be a more leftist idea by nature, but the technology is non-partisan.

Re:As /. has clearly shown

[blinkylights]

Good points, good post, but I'm not sure I can agree with your OSS/Communism association. There is a growing and maturing OSS industry which is built on a much more productive model (customers hire experts to implement/extend/develop OSS) than the regressive incumbent model (productized software designed with the goal of enhance profits over quality).

In previous conversations, I've heard it compared to the medical industry: 50 years ago we had a model where individual private-practice doctors were the foundation of the industry, and the majority of the research was done by academics, whereas now health care has been productized to the point where significant numbers of people can't afford it, and it's more a system designed to absorb retirement savings than save and extend lives. In short, whereas before individual attention and personal care created an industry that included compassion, proffessionalism and trust, now it's just about bottom lines.

Look at OSS vs. closed-source in the same light, and you'll see some similarities. Closed-source software companies make decisions based on achieving return business and lock-in rather than on what's best for the security and overall quality of the software product or the needs of their customers. I doubt if anyone here who actually develops open-sourced software does it purely for altruistic reasons. (Looks good on resumes if nothing else). But even with whatever personal-gain reasons they have, most do it because it's just what they do... they like it and they'd do it whether they get any money out of it or not. Just like with medical care, doing it for the right reasons makes for better software, and a better software industry.

The fact that the OSS model favors individuals and small-business entrepeneurs over mega-corps like Microsoft and runs contrary to the aspects of American business culture that create things like SCO, does not necessarily mean that the OSS idea has anything to do with communism or even socialism.

This isn't going to work

[TerryAtWork]

The suits trying to steal the internet (after letting it get away from them ) and our computers know full well the people who actually have a grip on this technology are few and far between.

The sheep-like consumer who they are trying to lock into a TV-like, owned by the few, push technology state and who make up all the numbers, won't care.

Things are going to get worst before they get better, if they get better at all.

Could be a good thing...

[ChuckDivine]

Then again, it might not.

I'm one of the older generation of techies who did get involved in politics as far back as the 1960s. In the 1970s I joined the now gone L5 Society because I thought space had a real role to play in human affairs. It still could.

But it would be helpful if today's political activists learned a bit from our mistakes. Practically all L5ers were political neophytes. We took up our cause with enthusiasm. For awhile we gathered some attention. So why aren't we all living in space colonies now? Here are some reasons I can think of:

• We didn't really connect with the larger society as much more than entertainment. People were intrigued -- but not motivated to part with real money.
• We relied too much on exposition of our ideas. Listening to what others wanted and seeing if we could tailor our activities to others' wants and needs seems important to me now.
• We underestimated the difficulties we faced.
• Initially we trusted too much in NASA and the aerospace establishment. Now, ironically enough, we might be trusting too little. That unfortunately is the consequence of dealing too much with an increasingly rigid hierarchy that has been becoming more and more dysfunctional.
• Techies are damned good with technology. We tend to have significant problems in dealing with people, though. Some of us are working to overcome that shortcoming.
• Broadening our horizons, listening more, seem like good ideas. Easier said than done, though. First step: ask people why they do things. Ask them why they are so concerned about technology and worry so much about things that we know are relatively minor problems.

These are just a few thoughts early in the morning. Others will probably be able to think of others.

Summing up, try to learn from our mistakes -- and from our successes. Politics isn't as neat and orderly like technology.

"We techies "

[turnstyle]

Software millionares generally make their millions selling software.

It's safe to assume that having millions puts you in a better position to influence government.

Though P2P and GPL seem to be the battle cry, it's worth considering the potential of those systems to generate a new round of millionares who can, in turn, influence government.

Re:"We techies "

[turnstyle]

Dollars != Influence

Perhaps (Dollars != Influence) but certainly (Dollars >> Influence)

That doesn't necessarily mean bribing politicians -- it could mean paying for busses to transport people, paying to print flyers, and so on.

Techies, Slashdotters, and voting

[chia_monkey]

I was trying to figure out the significance of this all. I know ever since I started checking Slashdot every day I've become a bit more vocal and interested in politics. I asked myself why. I've got a little experience with the military, I've got a pretty decent education, but why did I wait?

I don't really think it's an issue of "techies", but more of "techies that care". Not just any clock-punching techie is going to be vocal on Slashdot (or any other "organization") and be interested in how this legislation will affect that privacy, how this bill will help Company A and screw Company B and how it all affects us and our economy. This transcends all groups though, not just techies. Your random worker at Kmart may care about gun laws a bit, but it's the member of the NRA that will follow the bills and legislations and try to have their voices heard. Same with your random citizen watching the war on TV as compared to someone with a family member in service...they've got more interest and thus are more apt to be vocal and take part in politics.

I think the techies are getting more coverage now though because it's finally socially acceptable to be a geek and know how to configure mom's computer after a crash. Computers are such a part of modern society and not just for the geeks anymore. It's easier to let it all out, speak your mind, and not be shunned.

Re:if only...

[Anne_Nonymous]

We mobilized to b!tch slap specific spammers.
We mobilized to protest Turbotax spyware.
We mobilized to protest the "Patriot" Act.

/.ers are probably never going to agree on a particular candidate, but that doesn't mean we don't attempt to change the world because of what we read here.

Just out of curiosity ..

[cje]

.. what are some of the "extremist ideas that reek of communism" that are "frequently explored" on Slashdot? From my experience on Slashdot, there are just as many right-wing zealots here as there are left-wing zealots. For every person espousing (for example) a completely public government health care system, there's another person arguing (for example) that we ought to end income taxes and all entitlement programs. It all goes back to the original point: the "tech community" has no coherent political agenda.

Or You Could Run Yourself!

[Cy Guy]

Like this techie is doing. "a 26-year-old high-tech programmer from Mountain View", who has already won the unofficial endorsement of Washington Post Writer Howard Kurtz, though this seems to be mostly based on her using cafepress to sell endorsed thong underwear as a fundraising tool. Regardless, she is using the net to propel her campaign to an extent that she is garnering press attention even among the strippers and pornographers and actors.

I think the Dean campaign shows that it is media access that makes the biggest difference in getting an unknown launched, and techs are the media of the 21st century.

Re:if only...

[edunbar93]

We mobilized to b!tch slap specific spammers.
We mobilized to protest Turbotax spyware.
We mobilized to protest the "Patriot" Act.

Yeah, and look at what we've got.

An infinite number of spammers.
Turbotax spyware.
The Patriot Act.

It's a pretty good indication that politicians don't give a tinker's damn about us, and we have about as much influence as ants on the sidewalk.

I couldn't help but notice that we make up all of about 5% of the current Internet population, never mind the rest of the population.

Re:As a registered voter...rant

[Abm0raz]

I have that right and privilege as long as I protect it. Not with guns and violence, but by ...

Actually, this is why the right to bear arms exists. So that if the Government becomes too corrupt and evil and starts to self-perpetuate it's own power, growing uncontrollably, the people can rise up and strike the gov't down. That is the beauty of the US constitution/bill of rights. It was a government that was designed to be overthrown.

This could be extrapolated to current times. I can just see it now, a big red button in a glass case in every home with sign that says, "In case of excessive government corrupt, break glass and push button."

-Ab