Slashdot Mirror
Bill Joy For New National CTO Post?
jddeluxe writes "In an article in today's NY Times, John Doerr of Kleiner-Perkins proffered up Bill Joy's name when queried by Barack Obama for a recommendation for the position of Chief Technology Officer of the Unites States which Obama has promised to create and that the country is overdue to have.
I think that's a brilliant idea, and while you're at it, have the FCC report to him as well, why don't you?" If Bill is unavailable, I'll throw my hat in the ring, although I'm holding out for Secretary of Tubes.
I seem to recall Bill Joy having some decidedly pessimistic and even luddite attitudes towards future tech, but it's been so long since he's been in the news that I don't remember now what. Paranoid about nanotech, I think, for starters.
Infuriate left and right
I think such things as the prevalence of spyware on PCs and the reluctance of many people to offer music or movie shares stands as proof that most people actually can't make their own technology decisions.
You mean this?
"I am no apologist for Kaczynski. His bombs killed three people during a 17-year terror campaign and wounded many others. One of his bombs gravely injured my friend David Gelernter, one of the most brilliant and visionary computer scientists of our time. Like many of my colleagues, I felt that I could easily have been the Unabomber's next target. Kaczynski's actions were murderous and, in my view, criminally insane. He is clearly a Luddite, but simply saying this does not dismiss his argument; as difficult as it is for me to acknowledge, I saw some merit in the reasoning in this single passage. I felt compelled to confront it."
Bill Joy doesn't sound that out of line. If you're going to confront terrorists, you need to understand their doctrine and motivation so that you can discredit the entire philosophy, rather than just turn them into martyrs.
The Obama administration may be the place where the driving of the golden spike uniting open source development with open source government takes place. Using Federal IT standards to drive proprietary formats out of the government departments will create a cascade of rationalization and standardization throughout the US economy. Our creaky and costly medical care system desperately needs this kind of rationalization.
Accordingly, a prominent and effective member of the Open Source community should occupy this position, not a big-time software corporatist.
Bill Joy is also the guy who keeps warning of the end of the world if we don't stop developing various technologies. He wrote a number of articles and did a bunch of interviews about the world turning to gray goo if we don't kill nanotech research, how computers and weapons will kill us all, etc.
He started work on a self-sufficient, solar powered sailboat, presumably his form of a bomb shelter for the coming techpocolypse.
Basically, he has turned in to a crazy old coot.
Yes, I know what you're saying also, but let me quote rs79, a /. oldtimer:
Brian K. Reid. Everybody else is either too corrupt or too bizarre to actually do the job. Brian understands people, unlike most geek geniuses.
Now, limiting the controlling input to such a function for the ENTIRE COUNTRY to one person is fraught with problems as illustrated by the quote above. Even one President is backed up by House, Senate, and SCOTUS. See, if it's important, there should be some checks and balances. Just the mere mention of M$ on this site is cause for a flamewar. How would a single CTO personage be able to deal with all the crap/politics/bribery/governmental interference and all that will come their way? Even the DoJ was not free from corruption. One person, without a jury behind them, will fall prey to special interests. It seems inevitable. The idea is right, perhaps even the execution of that idea will be, but I have doubts about a single person as head of that implementation.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
This is a common misconception.
Bush did nothing to deregulate the financial industry.
He is a flaming chowderhead and guilty of high crimes against the people of the United States and the Constitution. But to be fair, this particular accusation doesn't stick.
No one in the government encouraged mortgage lenders to make the "liars loans" (loans with no effort to verify employment and income status), package them and re-market them as AAA securities on the international market. Listen to this (45 min or so).
Obama: Nuclear power worth considering, not panacea
Could it be that Obama is actually a center-Right presidential candidate, and not the radical left wing terrorist sympathizing deep green wacko he was portrayed as in the campaign? Say it ain't so, Joe (the Plumber).
But think about it, a really representative panel of that sort would really need someone representing, say, Microsoft, maybe Apple, maybe HP and/or Dell, and then a couple of FOSS guys. Imagine Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, RMS, and ESR on such a committee. Easily imagined. Now imagine anything getting done by this committee, ever... Not so easily imagined. When the closed source guys were not fighting over which of their personal pet technologies was best for a given purpose, they'd be in grid-lock as RMS and the FOSS guys try to block all proprietary anything. I'd be inclined to say that the closed source people should get 4 seats and the FOSS 3 seats: on the theory that it's more likely that at least on closed source advocate would side with FOSS on a given specific question than that the the FOSS guys will ever side with the closed source guys, and if all 4 cosed source guys agree with something it's likely to be a least a slightly open system.
Still I think one guy, preferably fairly neutral and willing to work with all parties and being advised by a committee like you recommend, would be better. He might not always do what any one of us might want or hope he'd do, but a least something will get done.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.