Dale Spender

Date: Apr 06 1999 14:48:02 EDT
From: "Helen Whitehead"
Subject: Reply to Dale Spender

The British government wants to give all schoolchildren access to a computer. Dale will think this is a step in the right direction. But at the same time as new initiatives are introduced, the old infrastructure such as the "imaginative solution of the public library" is falling apart. There are UK cities where readers are up in arms about the closure of public libraries to save money to be used for computers. This shouldn't happen -- but it does.

And you wouldn't have to go far to find someone to complain about the lack of investment in physical infrastructure: such as the failings of the train companies, and the increasingly patched and potholed state of our overcrowded roads.

There are also good reasons to believe that computer literacy is not necessary for everyone. Concentration on the "e-society" could be detrimental to some perfectly good values and skills such as those of the craftsperson.

If e-literacy comes at the cost of arts and crafts (as it is doing in our schools these days) where are the next generation of carpenters, of plumbers, of house-painters, of welders going to come from? Creativity comes in many forms, not all computerisable.

Emphasis on the power of the electronic chip over the power of the skilled hand may rebound on us all in the end.

Date: Apr 06 1999 17:37:27 EDT
From: Barbara Steinberg
Subject: Reply from an ISP/C member

The Internet Service Providers Consortium's goal is to "function as the lead international trade association of ISPs, representing all of its ISP members." They can be found at http://www.ispc.org. After reading this opinion, I posted to their members list and asked for comments. This response was offered by Ed.

---------------------------------------
>From Ed:
The idea of government paying for computers and connections is far too socialist for the US, myself included. For the connectivity, would the gov't be purchasing from existing ISPs or setting up their own? If they went through current companies, one would ask, why is the government giving such large profits to so many companies with our tax dollars? If they DIDN'T use current ISPs, that would just be completely unacceptable, end of story, period. You can't put an entire industry out of business. What kind of economic development would the government be promoting there? What kind of free enterprise and freedom is that?

To look at the rest of the issue would be to use a broader political mindset rather than a "self-interest" mindset. If government should give everyone computers and an Internet connection, shouldn't it also give them a car and a house? It's not the government's role to provide everything to everyone. To put a project like this into place would require the gov't to raise taxes. This would then make it harder for people to buy (a) BETTER computers and Internet connections, (b) other things such as cars and houses.

How often would they upgrade my computer? Every year? Every other year? Every 3 years? It has to be at least that often, simply due to the incredible productivity and efficiency of the chip industry. The taxes for that would be sickening. And what if I want a Mac? I would never want a Mac, but will they buy one for me? It might cost a different amount. What if I want a SPARCstation? Is the government going to force me to pay for Microsoft products instead of costlier alternatives?

Also, how do you fight over dialup, cable, ADSL, ISDN, etc. etc. etc.? Who makes THAT decision? Right now, the two factors are availability and personal choice. Do we really need that much more politicking?

Date: Apr 06 1999 18:38:57 EDT
From: "Margaret Penfold"
Subject: Dale Spender's Article

Hi everyone,
I agree with Dale that everyone should be provided with a computer of their own, everyone that is over the age of six. Children under that age should share with their parents so that computing becomes a social affair and the computer is not put in the child's bedroom and treated as a childminder. More importantly all local calls should be free.

Human nature being what it is schools will need to set their homework tasks with care to ensure pupils study rather than download essays and mathematical examples from the net.

I agree with Helen that not everyone will need computers as their main working tool but they will still find a computer invaluable when organising their life, just as most people use roads although not everyone is a lorry driver.

Date: Apr 06 1999 22:36:47 EDT
From: Barbara Steinberg
Subject: Correction

The ISP/C list is open to members and non-members. I was not aware of this, although I should have been, as I am an individual member because of interest in the subject. Please allow me to print a correction from Ed. Thank you very much for your indulgence and patience.

-----------------

From Ed:
After looking at the post you made, I realized I might have been accidentally misleading.

I'm a partner in an Internet business, though we're not actually a member of the ISP/C, mostly due to financial reasons - we're quite small still. As you know from being on it, ispc-list@ispc.org is open to all, and I decided to sign up. I specifically responded because I enjoy letting people know my opinion.

While I represent the views of one Internet company owner, I can't represent the ISP/C, and my company is not a member. Sorry for the confusion.

Date: Apr 07 1999 00:19:09 EDT
From: Barbara Steinberg
Subject: My thoughts

I just feel if the government owned too much and controlled too much of the internet, our democracy would be threatened. It is the industry's ability to innovate by producing faster processors and networks that have allowed people to apply their imagination to technology to create the information revolution.

By choosing what kind of computer a person got, the government would be deciding what people's brains could do, and they would want people to follow certain regulations because nothing is ever free.

So what kind of computer? What applications would be on it? How much RAM? The software would have to come from some private company. Which company? Who would set the price of ISP access on these computers given to everyone? How are people who can't afford to feed their families supposed to pay for this access? Government is going to pay?

You don't want to pay those taxes. There is very little that would make me believe that anyone would want to pay those taxes for all these lovely ideals being spouted.

I couldn't imagine a big government bureauracy controlling the price of the network access on the computers they bought for people. They can't even make their agencies talk to eachother. Competition would be dead. The industry would not be able to function as a world competitor. Coupled with that, I believe I read about a wish that all local calls should be free. Do you know how many people would lose their jobs? There would be a major recession. In addition, if the government paid for access, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be a database somewhere that stored the email messages of those whose access was paid for.

Changes in a network happen very quickly. Existing links are turned off, others are beefed up, others go from primary to secondary routes. Backbone maps are rewritten to redesign networks for better redundancy and load distribution. This costs serious money. If the government assured access for everyone, they would have to control prices, and improvements would be bottlenecked in bureaucratic, political fights.

There are some other issues. Education. I once worked in a "tech prep" program for average students in New York City high schools. I would hear things from teachers like, "They want me to incorporate so much into the English curriculum. Now they want me to incorporate email? It's too much!" Or, Teacher:"I know the internet." Me:"Have you ever talked to anyone online?" Teacher:"No."

I have heard a lot of people cry out, I know of schools that are doing wonderful innovative things, but when I ask them where those schools are, they are always in wealthy suburbs. Throwing technology at people doesn't solve anything. Teaching about the purpose of technology so people have an imaginative vision when they turn on the computer is more useful.

Providing public internet access so that people who cannot afford computers can go to a library or other facility and log on to a free email account and use the web would be an idea I would favor more.

Another issue: In America, we have a strong lobbying force on the Christian Right. If the government issued computers to everyone, they would not want their tax dollars going to pay for computers and access that let folks log on to sites with sexual content. Then, since it was a government-issued comptuer, there would be a freedom-of-speech battle.

I believe very strongly in giving technology to those who can't afford it. I am actually doing it. Is anyone else doing it? I have a web cast radio station, the equipment for which I bought. The people who run it wouldn't have had a hope in the world of putting it together, and the government is not going to buy one person such a technology sculpture.

I have seen the light in the eyes of children, who wouldn't get a second look, when a microphone is put in their hands and they are allowed to do a little show each week. They are learning technology. But this little network is my creation.

Fast processors and network access allowed me to create. A government-issued computer would have kept me in the jail of not being able to do anything that computer couldn't do. If I had to pay the taxes of such a huge social-engineering operation, I might not have been able to afford much else.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. It didn't work in the Soviet Union. It is not going to work in networking.

Date: Apr 07 1999 03:17:08 EDT
From: "Margaret Penfold"
Subject: Re: My thoughts

Hi Barbara and everyone, at last a discussion that is causing genuine heat.

The myth here in the UK is that most USA citizens have free local calls anyway. Here in the UK the 'free' ISP's (paid for by advertising like our free papers) are becoming very successful. I noticed the other day that one was actually offering free telephone calls, whether as a temporary or permanent measure I do not know. If people are still making their calls I do not see who is going to become unemployed.

As Dale was suggesting government initiative in this area is not charity but investment. Having free access to public libraries has not prevented people from going to bookshops to buy their own books. Free spectacles did not stop people buying designer frames. I cannot see why free personal computers would prevent people and commerce from buying their own upmarket models.

I was interested to hear that teachers in the USA are in as backward a state when it comes to technology as those over here. I can't see how that can be turned into an argument against the introduction of universal computers. It is surprising how competent those same teachers become once they have computers of their own. One of the pleasures in my life has been seeing that miracle happen.

Those of us who are even semi-computer literate, could it be that we feel ourselves to be an elite and are jealously trying to guard our own prestige?

more responses to Dale Spender's Opinion...