Slashdot Mirror
Politicians Have Poor Grasp of Technology?
Alfred Lee Deon writes "Chris Patten, a former EU Commissioner, was speaking at the three-day conference in Nice, France, on European business and technology. 'Many politicians don't understand the technology issues that could affect government IT schemes,' he said.' Politicians have no sound grasp of technology issues — but politicians don't necessarily have a profound grasp of any issue.' He was especially critical of UK's government's ID card scheme — a scheme he felt would not achieve one of its possible objectives of making borders more secure."
Oh please... It's clear that our fearless leader has been using the google on the internets for years. I hear he looks up maps.
but in America our politicians have a strong grasp of how to use technology... for hooking up with underage boys.
"I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability."-Oscar Wilde
What can be done about it? None of those people are reachable like they claim and everyone who goes against the norm (lobbyists) will be discarded as a radical...
Reality is nothing but a collective hunch.
It is not just a problem in the EU and UK. We have major IT issues related to privacy, government and oversight here in the US and this is why we need to start populating the political system with politicians who *understand* some of the political issues. People like Pete Ashdown who is running against Orin Hatch (the guy who wanted to remotely destroy computers of those who download music) in Utah are the types of folks that we need to elect. Pete owns one of the first ISPs in Utah and has been at the technological forefront for a number of years. He understands how technology impacts government and business and effects the lives of private citizens.
Populating the political landscape with technologically savvy folks will eventually happen as a matter of statistics, but right now we are dealing with lawyers, jocks and business people as politicians who it seems frequently rely on their staff to even read and answer their emails, much less actually possessing an understanding of more complex technological issues or their wider implications. However, with issues like the massive cost overruns and failure of projects like the FBIs agency wide computer system, loss of privacy and government intrusion into our lives sought by those in the Republican party (OT: what happened to the Republicans? They *used* to be about smaller government, less intrusion into our lives, lower taxes, and a strong military. They are now 180degrees off from all of those issues), we need a new generation of politicians who will be responsive to the people they represent, will understand some of the complex technological issues and all of the social, political and economic implications that technology brings.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Assigning a grade of "poor" to politicians' grasp of technology implies they have grasp, most don't. They (IMO) seemingly react to political winds, political windbags, and moneybags. I can't recall ever seeing a politician on TV, or elsewhere and thinking, "Gee, that politician really gets it!".
And, that's probably why we see laws passed and considered that continue to feed the wealthy and lock in their revenue streams. Technology has so much potential, it is almost mind-boggling what we could and should be doing with it, but instead (IMO) we've watched the train wreck that is our (and now others (BTW, an American here)) government and their bizarre understanding spawning laws that not only hinder technology, they are indecipherable (anyone understand fair use anymore at all?).
The future continues to look more locked in with probably one major provider of technology with a track record of bumbles and fumbles that boggle. Money talks, and politicians listen.
I used to see a future of broad interconnected technology, almost transcendental and transparent. Instead, I see vertical silos of incompatible rubbish that doesn't even mature before generation N+1 is released... the technology moves "forward", our ability to use and access to technology diminishes. (Anyone still confident HDTV, HD DVD, BluRay, etc. will have a soft landing with everyone up and running happily? It's been 10 years since HD, what gives?)
Ironically, glimpses of technology at its best were government funded, the internet is largely an outgrowth of ARPA and DARPA funding. Hubble is NASA. One (the internet) is on the cusp of being regulated to death, to the benefit of the powerful lobbying of powerful groups. The other (Hubble) is on the chopping block for monies in almost any other context would be paltry...
Another interesting lack of understanding manifested after the 2000 elections. The confident rush to technology and electronic voting paradoxically ended up being pointed at as the culprit for another "stolen" election by the very people who had demanded the technology.
There's still a lot of good technology, and there will be a lot more, but it won't be because of the good hands of government. I'm hoping I never see politicians encroach to the point of locking up and out the Open Source and Linux worlds, but I'm fearing I might (Trusted Computing anyone?).
After all, they seem to be able to use instant messenger quite well.
Track and chart data from your bike computer.
...most politicians are geezers in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and sometimes 90s. so the current crop is ignorant, but in once the current crop starts to really turn over, those politicians should be more up to date. that said, i know some people in that age range that have a good grasp, and other who do not. the latter outweigh the former. additionally, i know a good portion of my classmates on campus are ignorant of technology as well. eh.
always mosh clockwise
...except how to hold on to power. That's their job, really, and the good ones do it well. No one ever lost an election because they didn't understand the things they were supposed to be making laws about. See also http://www.pontification.com/serendipity/index.php ?/archives/117-The-Know-Nothing-Party.html/
True. For example, take the worst case: Ted Stevens. I mean, he was correct to say that "The internet is not a truck.", yes yes? That's true. The internet is not a truck.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
I have yet to see a single politician ever talk convincingly on any matter that involves technology. Living in the UK and having to hear some of the claims given about the ID Cards Database is enough to make me laugh at times. On top of that the Government continues to spend huge amounts of money on IT schemes that could be done with a fraction of the money. These schemes are generally run by everyones favourite useless shower of bastards, EDS. Invariably these gigantic schemes fail, leaving the Government without their much-touted improvements (Many of them imaginary, but still) and EDS with a pocket full of cash. Then the cycle begins again with the next eye-watteringly huge contract for another IT scheme.
It seems the highest level of IT amongst UK politicians is the ability to post a stupid clip of yourself on YouTube. I believe Tony Blair doesn't even use email, and I'd be amazed of Gordon Brown can even switch a PC on, frankly.
Syllable : It's an Operating System
A person who gets involved in politics may begin as an ideologue on one or more issues, but with the massive amount of issues that a politician must deal with, it's difficult if not impossible to keep up with them all. Thus, interest groups can influence pols by aligning with political parties to affect whatever outcomes they desire.
Unfortunately, as long as there is an expectation that a government should be involved in every issue, this is the way things will be. A perfectly reasonable solution to the problem would be to ignore these buffoons, and the problem will eventually go away. At the very least, vote for someone who will be ineffectual for a couple of years and routinely toss them out. Or, just vote for a drunken pirate for the laugh value.
Because, in the long run, we are all dead.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
For the most part - politicians in the US are lawyers and tend to be from the boomer generation. As such, they tend to have no training and little exposure to technology. Their technological background ranges from ignorance to neo-luddite. Is it any wonder when they turn out absurd policies regarding science and technology. I suppose we should be grateful that they're not still using quill pens.
[Insert pithy quote here]
"Everyone knows that Congresspeople are assigned to committees based on their greatest weakness! Why else would Senator Ted Stevens, a man more comfortable in the horse and buggy era, wind up in charge of regulating the Internet... which, he believes, is a series of tubes... a series of tubes through which other Congressmen can reach in and fondle sixteen-year olds?"
Nobody can be proficient with all the topics a legislator works on.
What's suppsed to happen is that their hired staff is, or consults, experts in the field and briefs the politician on the issues and options.
We get the politicians we vote for, anyway. I wrote to my state legislator once about e-voting and he'd heard of GEMS: he wrote back to the effect "It's a nightmare. Access was never designed for that kind of application". Be certain I'm voting for him next time he's up.
Because it made it clear that the guy who was supposed to be in charge of this stuff for the government was about half way to step 1 on understanding the nature of what he was writing laws about. The guy was giving a talk that was at a level we might have given grade school children in 1995, in 2006, to the US congress. One got the impression that he had just finally read up on how the whole thing worked a week before that speech.
I read the internet for the articles.
From a lot of the "political" comments on /. it's fairly apparent that most IT people/geeks have no real grasp on governmental affairs.
It's fantastic when slashdotters throw around terms like "censorship" when censorship is not really involved (thus proving said posters have no grasp on politics) but god fucking forbid a guy call it "the google".
It's sad how much we sit around here patting ourselves on the back for being so 31337 when the fact is that most of us are severely unqualified to do much more than post on slashdot.
I wonder if on some political site they're discussing how slashdotters have no grasp on politics.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Is that grasp of technology or strangle hold on?
One of the fine senators from the US state of Utah, one Orrin Hatch, attempted to pass legislation that would allow organizations such as the RIAA to illegally infiltrate and destroy software and information on personal computers of the citizens whom he supposedly represented. It seems the corporations he actually represents find the legal process and the concept of innocent until proven guilty by your peers in a court of law to be too cumbersome for them to deal with.
The same senator recently had an article on his website where he supported the "technology" behind the CP80 (clean port 80) effort. Unfortunately the CP80 effort is not technology but rather is another legal effort to throw people in jail who refuse to adhere to the mores of a specific segment of society and block undesireable internet content from other countries, pretty much what China does to their citizens, perhaps the CP actually stands for China Protocol. No technology was developed for CP80 its just an effort to create laws based on the mores of a minority.
The irony is that this senator started his political carreer by pushing out an incumbent with the following critical stance in his election effort "Hatch criticized Moss's 18-year tenure in the Senate, saying that many Senators, including Moss, had lost touch with their constituents". This was the beginning of Hatch's political career which started in 1976!
burnin
"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself." - Mark Twain.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Series of tubes, anyone?
Ha ha. That was funny.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
They did use CNN to get their information on Katrina...
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
IT people aren't in the position to make good decisions to affect millions (or dare I say, billions?) of people, and, most importantly it's not their job. Politicians are SUPPOSED to make good decisions. Whether that requires them to learn something or get people that do, that IS their job. This post is like responding to a situation of a coach of a losing team by saying that some complaining players on the losing team don't know anything about coaching.
military
US reliance on mercenaries is at an all time high. Though the polically correct term is 'private security contractors'.
Note the war in Iraq is dragging on and there is no vested interest by mercenaries in peace. See also the 40 years war, a conflict in which the mercenary princes fueled the conflict to continue the wars.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+