Joab Jackson on Mon, 1 Mar 1999 02:10:13 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Techno-Colonization |
Something I wrote for the Kansas City Pitch Weekly: http://www.pitch.com/sections/news+features/cyber.html Techno-Colonization By Joab Jackson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- So here's my rant for the week: I'm at the local supermarket, picking up the usual supplies of cola and donuts, and I'm waiting in line behind a person paying for her purchases with a cash card, or trying to anyway. She runs the wrong end of the card through the reader, the side without the magnetic strip. Then, she randomly punches a few keys, and turns to those of us behind her and says, "Oh, I just don't know how to work these things," flashing a smile. The socially appropriate reaction, of course, would be empathy. "Yes, this technology stuff is beyond me, too," we should say, chuckling. "Things are changing every day and, gosh darnit, who among us can keep up?" But all I felt was impatience. Sure, we all fall to moments of stupidity, but I'm sorry, it's 1999, and not knowing which end of your ATM card to swipe should no longer be acceptable. I sat down later and thought about why she did this. This woman was well-dressed. She looked like she did well in this big complex world of ours, so it's doubtful she just wasn't smart enough to understand that it's the magnetic strip of the card holding the information. Perhaps, she was just being passive-aggressive, sending a message to the store that any swiping done would be executed a few rungs down the social-economic ladder, by, say, the cashier (who, in fact, ended up doing it for her). But when you really get down to it, I'd wager she just felt no social responsibility of figuring out how ATM cards worked. Once upon a time, maybe 10 years ago, such folksy habits were acceptable. If you weren't into fiddling with VCRs or computers or such, that was OK. Not so any longer. Now, digital technology is not a hobby; it is a weapon. In fact, digital technology is one of the most dangerous weapons to come along in a long while, and people should at least know what can be done with it. The sentiment of technology-equals-weaponry may seem extreme, but at least one way to look at history is to see those with dominant technology lording it over those without: The Romans with their aqueducts and roads, The Portuguese with their ships, the British with their steam power. As the Brits became complacent, economic advantage shifted to those more aggressively innovative countries, like the United States and Germany. In short, those with the technology reaped the riches, those without, to put it euphemistically, got colonized. And why would it be any different now? Even the government understands this: President Clinton announced a proposed $1.46 billion program to protect critical systems from cyber and other attacks. That's fine for the country, but you also have to protect yourself. With ever greater amounts of computer power at their disposal, why shouldn't businesses and governments build databases on you, track your behavior with ever greater degrees of precision and surround you psychologically until you're fenced in at their mercy like one of those factory-farmed calves? Club 'em while they're young, as good chefs like to say. If one chooses to read the news through this filter, one can see hints of the powers-that-be gearing up already. Remember last month when it was found that Intel's Pentium III chips came with the feature of having its processor serial numbers automatically read over the Internet, identifying its owners in the process (www.bigbrotherinside.com/)? The company backed down from implementing the feature only when activists made this information known. Or how about the Secret Service's proposed national database of driver's license photos that the American Civil Liberties Union is now railing against (www.aclu.org/news/1999/ n021899a.html)? And did anyone catch that article in the December Scientific American that explained how Microsoft had given Cambridge University $20 million in research money to figure out how to have Microsoft's software "broadcast" its serial number ("Beating the Tempest": www.sciam.com/1998/1298issue/1298techbus4.html) "In principle, properly equipped vans could patrol business districts looking for copyright infringements," the article read. Isn't the idea of Microsoft vans patrolling your business district a little creepy? And how much can this company really be suffering from piracy when its founder is arguably the richest man in the world? And that's not even getting into the weird conspiracy stuff, such as psychrotronics: "An entirely new arsenal of weapons, based on devices designed to introduce subliminal messages or to alter the body's psychological and data-processing capabilities, might be used to incapacitate individuals. These weapons aim to control or alter the psyche, or to attack the various sensory and data-processing systems of the human organism. In both cases, the goal is to confuse or destroy the signals that normally keep the body in equilibrium," reads an article in Parameters, a U.S. Army War College quarterly (http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/parameters/98spring/thomas.htm). Digital technology is getting more invasive and less user-friendly. And without some understanding of how it works, how can we know the possible threats it poses? The days of shrugging our shoulders, looking at the computer or the ATM card, and saying, "I just don't know how these things work" are over. -joabj@charm.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- http://www.charm.net/~joabj --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl