home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Chaos Computer Club 1997 February
/
cccd_beta_feb_97.iso
/
chaos
/
habi1
/
txt
/
hb1_65.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1997-02-28
|
5KB
|
131 lines
SELL COMPUTERS TO THE SOVIEIS? NELL ,YES!
CO~PUT8RS
ARD TRC
TOTAL9TAR9AR STATE
The July 9, 1984, issue of Computerworld printed
an article by Rex Malik, titled Communism vs. the
Computer which was based on an earlier essay
published in England. Malik made many sweeping
generalities which were difficult to evaluate and he
presented a slew of assumptions about the Soviet
economy which were also not verifiable. His main
theme, however, came across clear as a bell: the
Soviet l~nion cannot possibly take a lead in the
computer revolution. The reasons for this are many,
but in som, they lead to the conclusion that no
centralized State can survive the Information
Explosion.
There is an inherent paradox-in the computer.
When the year 1984 finally rolled around, it started
with a flurry of coramentaries from rightwingers
and leftwingers atike on the nature of the Orwellian
State. Isthisreally 1984?,theyasked. Inmostcases,
much was made of the massive data banks which the
Federal and State governments have assembled.
Only the most well hidden people are not on some
system's file somewhere. It was `'obvious" to the
local sacialist and the syndicated conservative that
the computer represented a tool of the Total State.
When I heard that socialist on a radio talk show it
was clear to me that he was suffering from
computer-phobia. He had never used his home
computer to browse the stacks of the city library at 3
a. m. He had never called the NAS A Gasline. He was
not a subscriber to Compu-Serve or Dialog. I had to
admit that he was correct in assuming that the State
Police Red Squad was keeping his file on a disk
somewhere and probably had tele-communicated
the information to the FBI as well. But they had also
just as probably sent paperworlc through the mail.
The conservative columnist was afraid tbat
individual liberties might be jeopardized by the
Welfare and Education Departments as they gather,
correlate and exchange data about you and me. He
was mute later in the year when it was reported that
hackers had penetrated the TRW Database which
holds several score millions of peopie's credit
records. He also hasn't said a word about the
massive datafiles accumulated by data processing
service buresus like Automated Data Processing
(ADP) and Electronic Data Systems (EDS).
The computer is, on the one hand' just a tool. It is
little more than a fancy hammer. When teaching
computer literacy at local retail stores, I used to
draw analogies between the automobile and the
computer. Analogies are also possible between the
computer and the gun.
~9
Gunpowder gave kings the power to topple
barons and establish the first nations. Gunpowder
also gave John Wilkes Booth the power to kill
Abraham Lincoln. It is doubtful that Booth could
have been as successfnl in hand-to-hand combat
against Old Abe.
This nation is a republic because the people who
built it were genetically individualistic. One
expression of their desire to be free is the Second
Amendment to the Constitution: the People hold
for themselves the right to keep and bear arms.
Likewise, the computer can be used for good or ev~l.
If a machine is owned by an individualist, it is a tool
for producing freedom.
It is common to assume that a centralized
economy would use computers to control and
regulate people. The USSR has tried this with some
small measure of success. On the other hand, as
computers become cheaper to own and easier to
operate, they are cost-effective at lower and lower
levels of that centralized economy. Generally' in
order to use a gun, you have to own one or have
acquired one in some way. This is not true of the
computer.
When a small-size system is insta}led at a Soviet
metal fabricating plant, the people who use it are not
entirely limited in their activity. A computer which
stores production records can also hold a copy of
Dr. Zh~vago.
The Soviet system discourages individual
enterprise. So where do smart people put their
efforts? For one thing, the USS R has a great
collection of chess players. Also theoretical
physicists and mathematicians. These people en3oy
the power of their own thoughts and the pleasure of
thinking is completely private.
Along these lines, consider the computer
programmer. Can the State pretend to win in mental
combat against a programmer? As G. Gordon
Liddy might say it, in a Battle of Wills, the State is
unarmed.
In our country, the best paid systems analysts are
all but powerless when their computers are
subjeeted to heavy hacking by a clever teenager.