Hacker 2/HACKER2.mdf/cud/cud528a.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 9KB | 230 lines

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 00:56:26 EDT
From: Joe Abernathy <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 1--NREN Wrap (or "Joe's Ride at the Houston Chron")

((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following is Joe Abernathy's last story for
the Houston Chronicle. We've known Joe since 1990, and have found
him
a strong supporter of civil liberties in cyberspace.  As his
knowledge
of the the topic has grown, so has the sophistication of his
articles.
His periodic columns in The Village Voice's "Wired" section have
been
consistently penetrating commentaries on law, ethics, and policy.
We
wish Joe the best in his new life. Thanks Joe.))

NREN Wrap -- This is my last story for the Houston Chronicle. It is
to
appear on April 4, 1993. Please feel free to redistribute it for
any
non-commercial use.

    To those of you who have provided so much help these past four
years, thanks. It's been a real education. I've accepted the job of
Senior Editor-News at PC World magazine, and I'll still be writing
the
Village Voice Technocracy column, so I hope you'll all stay in
touch.
My new contact information is P.O. Box 572390, Houston, Texas
77257-2390, [e-mail].

   By JOE ABERNATHY
   Houston Chronicle Staff Writer

   The specters of class struggle and international economic
warfare
are casting a shadow over administration hearings on how to build
a
sophisticated national computer network.

   Billed as an engine of job growth, a central concern is emerging
that the "data superhigh way" promised by Vice President Al Gore
and
President Bill Clinton during the campaign could produce a large
underclass of "information have-nots."

   Based on an emerging global computer net work known as the
Internet, which links up to 12 million people in more than 30
nations,
the National Research and Education Network (NREN) is a decade-long
project of former Sen.  Gore.

   Gore envisions a future in which oceans of data, including
libraries of movies, books and other creative works, would be
readily
avail able to every home. In selling a $5 billion spending plan
focused on the network in 1992, Gore held forth the image of
classrooms without walls, sophisticated medical collaborations, and
globally competitive small businesses.

   "The NREN is at all odds the most important and lucrative
marketplace of the 21st century," he said in a recent statement.

   But in trying to make it work, it has become apparent that the
NREN
remains in many ways a captive of its privileged institutional
heritage.  Some Americans don't even have telephone service, and
many
still don't have computers with which to access the net.

     Two congressional hearings were held in late March concerning
the
National Information Infrastructure, and a bill has been introduced
that would take up where Gore's 1992 High-Performance Computing Act
left off _ bringing the net to classrooms, small business and other
potentially disenfranchised Americans. Clinton's budget includes an
additional $489 million over six years for the network.

    And while the regional Bells, newspapers and other information
giants have been struggling for years over the future of the
medium,
congressional insiders say that with the in creased attention, a
resolution seems likely to be found during the current session of
Congress.

    "What I think is really getting squeezed out is that there
hasn't
been a genuine, public interest, bottom-up grass roots voice. It's
a
huge, huge issue," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington
offices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the
primary champion of civil rights in the new electronic medium.
"It's
about people, it's about institutions, it's about who gets to
connect
and on what terms."

    Observers also fear that the rush to wield the network as an
economic weapon could produce dramatic incursions into free speech
and
other civil liberties.

   "I'm very concerned that the rhetoric about national
competitiveness is transforming itself into a new cold war," said
Gary Chapman, director of CPSR's 21st Century Project in Cambridge,
Mass. "The concerns of intelligence and other federal agencies
including NASA has been to look at technology resources that are
not
related to military security but to economic benefits as being
things
that have to be protected by Draconian measures of security."

   Recent disciplinary actions at NASA Ames Research Center in
Northern California seem to support Chapman's concerns.

   Up to eight of the 11 scientists disciplined in December were
targeted because of their participation in politically oriented,
international discussion groups hosted on the Internet computer
network, according to documents obtained by the Houston Chronicle
under the Freedom of Information Act, along with subsequent
interviews of NASA Ames personnel.

   "Some people there were accused of dealing with foreign
nationals
about non-classified technology issues," said Chapman, whose
organization also has made inquiries into the matter.  "NASA said
the U.S. has to protect its technology assets because of the global
environment of competitiveness."

   The issues are even simpler for Raymond Luh, a subcontracting
engineer fired by NASA. Luh, an American of Chinese ancestry, feels
that his career was destroyed simply because he joined in one of
the
thousands of political discussions aired each day over the
Internet.

    "I feel I have been gravely wronged by NASA," Luh said. "I
cannot possibly seek employment elsewhere. My reputation as a
law-abiding citizen and a hard-working researcher has been
tarnished
almost beyond repair."

    NASA refused to comment on the matter.

    According to FOIA documents provided by NASA's Office of the
Inspector General, Luh was fired when "a document containing
Chinese
writing was found in (Luh's computer). ... Investigation determined
that Luh's office computer held a large volume of files relating to
his efforts to promote Most Favored Nation trade status for the
People's Republic of China. ... Luh was not authorized to use his
computer for this activity."

   To Luh, however, he was only one of the chorus of voices that
joined in a fiery debate surrounding fallout from the Tiananmen
Square
massacre. He wasn't trying to make policy _ he was exercising
intellectual freedom, in his spare time.

    "That's a very dangerous and disturbing kind of trend," said
Chapman. "The parallel is with the Cold War and transforming the
modes of thinking and the practices of these agencies into new
forms
of control, even in the absence of militarily significant enemies.
We'll start thinking about the Japanese or whatever Pacific Rim
country you want to pick as being `enemies,' and intellectual
commerce
with these people will be a matter of economic security.

    "The freedom of expression aspect of that is very critical. We
want to make sure that this is a system in which people can express
themselves freely without repercussions."

     Observers fear that Luh may be only the first such casualty as
federal agencies and special interest groups reshape the Internet
into
their own model, carving up a pie estimated to be worth $3.5
trillion.

    While Gore's vision implies the construction of a high-speed,
high-tech fiber optic network, a number of counter-proposals are
being
floated.

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation _ which earlier made a name
for
itself with a successful court challenge to the conduct of the
Secret
Service in a hacker crackdown _ is focusing on building a less
powerful, less costly network that could reach more people, more
quickly.

   "Our central concern is that we get from debate to doing
something," said Jerry Berman, EFF director.

   EFF's approach _ endorsed by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass. _ is
to
build an ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) service atop
the
telephone network, making a modest level of digital computer
transmission available quickly to every home. The more
sophisticated
fiber optic approach implied by Gore's NREN could be implemented as
time and money allow.

   But few voices have been heard backing ISDN.

   "The current state of the discussion is turmoil and chaos," said
the CPSR's Rotenberg. "It's a mistake to place too much emphasis on
any technological configuration. A lot of that energy and those
resources would be better spent talking about users and
institutions
rather than technology and standards.

    "This is like trying to explain railroads in the 18th century
or
cars in the 19th century. Here we are in the 20th century, and we
know
something big is happening right under our feet and we know it has
something to do with these new telecommunications technologies.

   "None of us knows where this is going to take us, but I think
people should have some sensitivity to the prospect that the future
world we're going to live in is going to be shaped in many ways by
the
decisions we make today about the information infrastructure."

Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253