After reading (or atleast scanning) trough most of the comments, it seems like most people here misunderstand what he is saying. He is not necessarily saying that some sort of sentient machines will destroy us like T2 (although that is a possibility), what he is saying that our dependence on these machines may case us problems.
For example, if the electric grid went down in a town, the people would have to face hardships. No TV, no fridge (for food), no head/AC, etc. However, if , as the ubiquitious computing prmises, everything we do involves a computer chip (automated houses, automated transportation, automated medicine, automated reminders, agents making decisions and actually doing work for us), and if something catastrophic happens to those chips (y3k?), then will be utterly helpless. We derive great benefit, but we also become extremely dependent.
There also seem to be a lot of comments on how this is just a rehash of things said earlier. Well, he said that too. There may well be several philisophical papers written, but this was written for the 'common' man. As he said, just because we know that out actions may dramatically change the future doesn't mean that we are ready to make moral objections to what we are doing. In other words, what do we do when we discover something that may indeed have great benefit, but may also have the potential of destroying us. He is simply asking us to be prepared for the future. He is simply asking us to have vision and the forsight take into account the adverse affects of our work as well as the usual utopian prespective.
Wow, granted that this movie would be good for having high school physics students figure out all physical impossibilities...but it was a FREAKIN' MOVIE!
I left the movie theater thinking that it was a bit overdramatic at times, but other than that it was fine, I quite enjoyed it. It is bound to spark the interest of average non-scientist (nerds) when they realize that there have been theories that earth's life started from a martian bacteria traveling on a comet (alh84001 or something). They will find it interesting to see how artificial gravity is created on the space craft (the space craft's gravity is shut off by stopping it form rotating). It will be facinating for people to wonder, those who have wondered before, what would they do if they were in gary senise's shoes. etc., etc., etc.
THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN IT YET: It may not be one of the all time best, but it's not exactly a waste of 120 or so minutes either.
First of all I'm surprised at how far apart the perception and the reality of Pakistan are on slashdot. Internet penetration is apparently deeper than many think, (deeper than I thought, I was surprised when several of my cousins sent me emails).
Many have said that poor countries need to feed their poor before trying to acquire the net. Actually the communication capabilities the internet provides can help poor societies a great deal (another post already points to work done by a Bengladeshi professor Mohammad Yunis and his Grameen Bank). The recent nobel prize winning economist Indian economist Amartya Sen said that famines were not caused becasue of lack of food but because of lack of distribution. I haven't read his work but if it has to do with identifying towns or villages that are hardest hit, a network of concerned citizens with something like the internet may save countless lives. Just for good measure I should mention that the United Nations Human Development Index includes internet penetration as one of the criteria in measuring...well, human development (this report was originally started by a Pakistani economist, Dr. Habib-ur-Rehman, although I'm not sure of the name).
Abuse of the middle class is a mojor problem in many third world countries. The rich can afford (or ignore) the whims of the government of the day. The poor don't have anything so they don't have to fear anything taken from them. The middle class are the ones with at least some education who use their acquired education in offices or shops. Making things easier for them, such as cheap phone calls (dialpad.com) could greatly improve their quality of life. Many families have to either spend a great deal of money on phone calls to loved ones, or hold off on those expensive calls and not talk to their relatives and friends for long periods of times.
There are often labor intensive businesses in poor countries (with cheap labor). American companies have made a great deal of progress through information technology (not necessarily improved producitivy, but with the ability to do things that couldn't be done before such as better decisions due to better and timely date). Third world companies are often quite profitable due to cheap resources (and too often only due to cheap resources). If they could become more efficient (maximize their profits), it would greatly help their business and therefore their community (increased profit while keeping the same number of employees means each employee is contributing more towards a company's revenue, therefore, up to a limit, hiring more employees will increase revenue even more).
Unfortunately no one can take advantage of these things unless internet is available to more (MANY) more people. In the case of Pakistan (and much of the world, rich or poor) the cost and the lack of local content and localized user interface are obstacles that no government can reduce. The government of Pakistan has been quite liberal in promoting the IT sector (reduced taxes, cheap imports, 'technology parks,' etc.) Unfortunately it is a fact that phone calls are expensive. Even after our telecommunications company is privatized, the new owners will sure want to make some kind of living. Currently too few people even have a phone, wiring a location for internet becomes very expensive when the cost of adding phones is included (this basically applies to villages).
I believe the problem of lack of/expensive infrastructure can be, at least partially, solved through wireless internet (lets see what happens with internet over electric cables). If the right kind of equipment exists (perhaps like nokia's new wireless routers), even neighborhoods themselves could band together and get some sort of community based internet (with tech. support from local universities/government/NGOs or something). [SIDE NOTE: WE NEED CASE STUDIES ON HOW THIS IS DONE, NOT JUST POINT TO POINT WIRELESS CONNECTION WRITEUPS].
Localized content will exist once enough people have internet, it is only natural. There have been some surprising developments though. Again, I'm more familiar with Pakistan--a surprising amount of government information is online. A lot of ministries (at least federal) have their own websites. I needed some information from Pakistan Post Office so I sent them an email, I was surprised to receive a very detailed, timely, to the point and polite response. The huge number of Pakistani expatriats have cause a lot of e-commerce operations to go live. One can easily find book sellers, travel agents, people selling sweets (mithai), etc. This can't be targeted toward more than a million or two Pakistanis. Imagine what will happen when even a small portion of 140 million Pakistanis come online.
I believe the problem of Urdu (and punjabi/pushto/sindhi/balochi/etc/etc/etc and other languages of Pakistan) on computers is something that needs to be solved. Let's assume we expect people to use Linux (...just assume it already), developments such as the Pango project (which will enable urdu in X-Windows) at red-hat labs (www.pango.org) will help us overcome this problem (BTW: pango is a solution for almost all non-latin based languages, urdu was just an example). In the first stage only content storage is required. Most people who end up using a computer (at least in Pakistan) know enough english to get used to the menus (in other words they can read...they don't have to know the meaning because 'File' or 'Edit' themselves are not intuitive manu titles). Once one can store local language letters, contracts, emails, etc. computers become an order of magnitude more useful. In order to roll computers out to farmers and average citizens, not only do we need an intuitive interface in local language but also make it easy to use for those who are not completely literate (there is a reason fast food places get a lot of use out of their picture menus at airports, more people understand a picture than written words).
As a side note, when I say roll computers out to farmers or average citizens, I don't necessiraly mean a linux box or a pc. I mean a device that is connected to the internet. What they need is not computation but the network.
Finally, there was talk of social changes (which I guess what the original question). I think newspapers add great deal of value to the internet for expatriates of all kinds. Reading Pakistani news-papers (of which there are quite a few, and not just in English) became part of my routine somewhere along the way without me even knowing it. Where as before a news paper might have reported on an important speech, law or tready, now they are able to put the whole text online. At least in Pakistan, many of the letters published in the printed press are actually from overseas Pakistanis, foreigners and Indians (those who understand south asian politics know this is no small feat). I'm sure the same is true of India. True power of internet journalism became apparent when during a recent conflict the government of India banned a Pakistani newpaper site (perhaps it was an overzealous private ISP, can't really remember). Almost immediately alternative ways were provided for people inside India to read the newspaper. I believe an Indian newspaper itelf started mirroring the Pakistani paper. I'm sure the same would happen if the Pakistan government banned an Indian site. [Side note, I'm not totally opposed to "censors" however. I'm yet to be convinced of why pornography and bomb building instructions must be available to a society...the technical problem of stopping porn filters from filtering political speech not withstanding].
A few things I said are bound take make the economists on slashdot sick to their stomach. Please understand that I simiplified what I said since this is basically for a technical audience, not economist. Besides, I myself am a Computer Science student, what do you expect:)
I don't know much about nothin', but since aqua is supposed to have some open-source parts, can it be ported over to linux? Can it do (in desktop category) what GNOME and KDE are currently trying to do (again, not applications, just WM).
I don't mind GNOME/KDE, but it's just that Apple seems to have ALOT more experience in UI design. In fact, KDE/GNOME people may be great programmers, but the ease of use and the general, inviting, look and feel still isn't there (granter some themes are really cool). Here I am talking about making linux work for the masses, not just 'hackers.' I think there is a HUGE market for linux desktops in the third-world, especially since copy rights are going to be more strictly enforced. Again, I don't want flames, but I would like to hear what actual developers of GNOME and KDE have to say about this.
Is there opportunity here to somehow make Java faster? It seems redundant that the JVM converts to native code which gets converted to Crusoe's ISA. What if a JVM could directly convert to Crusoe's ISA. Please excuse my ignorance on technical matters; and please no flames about Java.
I've been looking into wireless technology for the past few weeks. I am more interested in what it takes to set up an wirless ISP that may have thousands (if not more) users (especially useful for thrid-world metropolitan cities). How would thousands of 'radio modems' (probably spread spectrum type thing) interact with a single hub (or a set of hubs throughout the city)? Exactly what kind of capabilities would these 'hubs' need to have? What kind of costs are involved...must get information....
It is always encouraging to see efforts to improve the conditions of thrid world countries. However, free software by itself, can do very little. I believe one of the most interesting developments (although now very new) is wireless networking.
I know that Pakistani internet users have to pay huge fees (for lower middle class, atleast) just to make voice phone calls. It costs about $15 (last time I checked) to have internet access for 5 hours/A MONTH! Wouldn't a completely wireless network (spread spectrum or whatever), which bypasses POTS dramatically bring down costs and allow more people to use the internet.
If more people have cheap internet, even more will buy computers...a feedback loop of sorts. There is the question of hungry people buying computers. From an economics point of view, easy availability of internet breaks down communication barriers and leads to more effective markets (I know, VERY simplified).
Another big problem is that of local interfaces. for example, ubiquitious internet is not possible unless user interfaces and content in local languages is available. Technically, it is even more difficult for people who have non-roman alphabets (for example, national language of Pakistan, Urdu is written in the opposite direciton of English, has different character shapes depending on where in the word it apprears...etc., tec.).
All in all, there is great potential.
Rather crude analysis but contact me if you are interested in this more: chaudhar@umich.edu
Slashdot Mirror
After reading (or atleast scanning) trough most of the comments, it seems like most people here misunderstand what he is saying. He is not necessarily saying that some sort of sentient machines will destroy us like T2 (although that is a possibility), what he is saying that our dependence on these machines may case us problems.
For example, if the electric grid went down in a town, the people would have to face hardships. No TV, no fridge (for food), no head/AC, etc. However, if , as the ubiquitious computing prmises, everything we do involves a computer chip (automated houses, automated transportation, automated medicine, automated reminders, agents making decisions and actually doing work for us), and if something catastrophic happens to those chips (y3k?), then will be utterly helpless. We derive great benefit, but we also become extremely dependent.
There also seem to be a lot of comments on how this is just a rehash of things said earlier. Well, he said that too. There may well be several philisophical papers written, but this was written for the 'common' man. As he said, just because we know that out actions may dramatically change the future doesn't mean that we are ready to make moral objections to what we are doing. In other words, what do we do when we discover something that may indeed have great benefit, but may also have the potential of destroying us. He is simply asking us to be prepared for the future. He is simply asking us to have vision and the forsight take into account the adverse affects of our work as well as the usual utopian prespective.
Wow, granted that this movie would be good for having high school physics students figure out all physical impossibilities...but it was a FREAKIN' MOVIE!
I left the movie theater thinking that it was a bit overdramatic at times, but other than that it was fine, I quite enjoyed it. It is bound to spark the interest of average non-scientist (nerds) when they realize that there have been theories that earth's life started from a martian bacteria traveling on a comet (alh84001 or something). They will find it interesting to see how artificial gravity is created on the space craft (the space craft's gravity is shut off by stopping it form rotating). It will be facinating for people to wonder, those who have wondered before, what would they do if they were in gary senise's shoes. etc., etc., etc.
THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN IT YET: It may not be one of the all time best, but it's not exactly a waste of 120 or so minutes either.
First of all I'm surprised at how far apart the perception and the reality of Pakistan are on slashdot. Internet penetration is apparently deeper than many think, (deeper than I thought, I was surprised when several of my cousins sent me emails).
...well, human development (this report was originally started by a Pakistani economist, Dr. Habib-ur-Rehman, although I'm not sure of the name).
:)
Many have said that poor countries need to feed their poor before trying to acquire the net. Actually the communication capabilities the internet provides can help poor societies a great deal (another post already points to work done by a Bengladeshi professor Mohammad Yunis and his Grameen Bank). The recent nobel prize winning economist Indian economist Amartya Sen said that famines were not caused becasue of lack of food but because of lack of distribution. I haven't read his work but if it has to do with identifying towns or villages that are hardest hit, a network of concerned citizens with something like the internet may save countless lives. Just for good measure I should mention that the United Nations Human Development Index includes internet penetration as one of the criteria in measuring
Abuse of the middle class is a mojor problem in many third world countries. The rich can afford (or ignore) the whims of the government of the day. The poor don't have anything so they don't have to fear anything taken from them. The middle class are the ones with at least some education who use their acquired education in offices or shops. Making things easier for them, such as cheap phone calls (dialpad.com) could greatly improve their quality of life. Many families have to either spend a great deal of money on phone calls to loved ones, or hold off on those expensive calls and not talk to their relatives and friends for long periods of times.
There are often labor intensive businesses in poor countries (with cheap labor). American companies have made a great deal of progress through information technology (not necessarily improved producitivy, but with the ability to do things that couldn't be done before such as better decisions due to better and timely date). Third world companies are often quite profitable due to cheap resources (and too often only due to cheap resources). If they could become more efficient (maximize their profits), it would greatly help their business and therefore their community (increased profit while keeping the same number of employees means each employee is contributing more towards a company's revenue, therefore, up to a limit, hiring more employees will increase revenue even more).
Unfortunately no one can take advantage of these things unless internet is available to more (MANY) more people. In the case of Pakistan (and much of the world, rich or poor) the cost and the lack of local content and localized user interface are obstacles that no government can reduce. The government of Pakistan has been quite liberal in promoting the IT sector (reduced taxes, cheap imports, 'technology parks,' etc.) Unfortunately it is a fact that phone calls are expensive. Even after our telecommunications company is privatized, the new owners will sure want to make some kind of living. Currently too few people even have a phone, wiring a location for internet becomes very expensive when the cost of adding phones is included (this basically applies to villages).
I believe the problem of lack of/expensive infrastructure can be, at least partially, solved through wireless internet (lets see what happens with internet over electric cables). If the right kind of equipment exists (perhaps like nokia's new wireless routers), even neighborhoods themselves could band together and get some sort of community based internet (with tech. support from local universities/government/NGOs or something). [SIDE NOTE: WE NEED CASE STUDIES ON HOW THIS IS DONE, NOT JUST POINT TO POINT WIRELESS CONNECTION WRITEUPS].
Localized content will exist once enough people have internet, it is only natural. There have been some surprising developments though. Again, I'm more familiar with Pakistan--a surprising amount of government information is online. A lot of ministries (at least federal) have their own websites. I needed some information from Pakistan Post Office so I sent them an email, I was surprised to receive a very detailed, timely, to the point and polite response. The huge number of Pakistani expatriats have cause a lot of e-commerce operations to go live. One can easily find book sellers, travel agents, people selling sweets (mithai), etc. This can't be targeted toward more than a million or two Pakistanis. Imagine what will happen when even a small portion of 140 million Pakistanis come online.
I believe the problem of Urdu (and punjabi/pushto/sindhi/balochi/etc/etc/etc and other languages of Pakistan) on computers is something that needs to be solved. Let's assume we expect people to use Linux (...just assume it already), developments such as the Pango project (which will enable urdu in X-Windows) at red-hat labs (www.pango.org) will help us overcome this problem (BTW: pango is a solution for almost all non-latin based languages, urdu was just an example). In the first stage only content storage is required. Most people who end up using a computer (at least in Pakistan) know enough english to get used to the menus (in other words they can read...they don't have to know the meaning because 'File' or 'Edit' themselves are not intuitive manu titles). Once one can store local language letters, contracts, emails, etc. computers become an order of magnitude more useful. In order to roll computers out to farmers and average citizens, not only do we need an intuitive interface in local language but also make it easy to use for those who are not completely literate (there is a reason fast food places get a lot of use out of their picture menus at airports, more people understand a picture than written words).
As a side note, when I say roll computers out to farmers or average citizens, I don't necessiraly mean a linux box or a pc. I mean a device that is connected to the internet. What they need is not computation but the network.
Finally, there was talk of social changes (which I guess what the original question). I think newspapers add great deal of value to the internet for expatriates of all kinds. Reading Pakistani news-papers (of which there are quite a few, and not just in English) became part of my routine somewhere along the way without me even knowing it. Where as before a news paper might have reported on an important speech, law or tready, now they are able to put the whole text online. At least in Pakistan, many of the letters published in the printed press are actually from overseas Pakistanis, foreigners and Indians (those who understand south asian politics know this is no small feat). I'm sure the same is true of India. True power of internet journalism became apparent when during a recent conflict the government of India banned a Pakistani newpaper site (perhaps it was an overzealous private ISP, can't really remember). Almost immediately alternative ways were provided for people inside India to read the newspaper. I believe an Indian newspaper itelf started mirroring the Pakistani paper. I'm sure the same would happen if the Pakistan government banned an Indian site. [Side note, I'm not totally opposed to "censors" however. I'm yet to be convinced of why pornography and bomb building instructions must be available to a society...the technical problem of stopping porn filters from filtering political speech not withstanding].
A few things I said are bound take make the economists on slashdot sick to their stomach. Please understand that I simiplified what I said since this is basically for a technical audience, not economist. Besides, I myself am a Computer Science student, what do you expect
I don't know much about nothin', but since aqua is supposed to have some open-source parts, can it be ported over to linux? Can it do (in desktop category) what GNOME and KDE are currently trying to do (again, not applications, just WM).
I don't mind GNOME/KDE, but it's just that Apple seems to have ALOT more experience in UI design. In fact, KDE/GNOME people may be great programmers, but the ease of use and the general, inviting, look and feel still isn't there (granter some themes are really cool). Here I am talking about making linux work for the masses, not just 'hackers.' I think there is a HUGE market for linux desktops in the third-world, especially since copy rights are going to be more strictly enforced. Again, I don't want flames, but I would like to hear what actual developers of GNOME and KDE have to say about this.
Is there opportunity here to somehow make Java faster? It seems redundant that the JVM converts to native code which gets converted to Crusoe's ISA. What if a JVM could directly convert to Crusoe's ISA. Please excuse my ignorance on technical matters; and please no flames about Java.
I've been looking into wireless technology for the past few weeks. I am more interested in what it takes to set up an wirless ISP that may have thousands (if not more) users (especially useful for thrid-world metropolitan cities). How would thousands of 'radio modems' (probably spread spectrum type thing) interact with a single hub (or a set of hubs throughout the city)? Exactly what kind of capabilities would these 'hubs' need to have? What kind of costs are involved...must get information....
It is always encouraging to see efforts to improve the conditions of thrid world countries. However, free software by itself, can do very little. I believe one of the most interesting developments (although now very new) is wireless networking.
I know that Pakistani internet users have to pay huge fees (for lower middle class, atleast) just to make voice phone calls. It costs about $15 (last time I checked) to have internet access for 5 hours/A MONTH! Wouldn't a completely wireless network (spread spectrum or whatever), which bypasses POTS dramatically bring down costs and allow more people to use the internet.
If more people have cheap internet, even more will buy computers...a feedback loop of sorts. There is the question of hungry people buying computers. From an economics point of view, easy availability of internet breaks down communication barriers and leads to more effective markets (I know, VERY simplified).
Another big problem is that of local interfaces. for example, ubiquitious internet is not possible unless user interfaces and content in local languages is available. Technically, it is even more difficult for people who have non-roman alphabets (for example, national language of Pakistan, Urdu is written in the opposite direciton of English, has different character shapes depending on where in the word it apprears...etc., tec.).
All in all, there is great potential.
Rather crude analysis but contact me if you are interested in this more: chaudhar@umich.edu