Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Re: Techno Terror Message-ID: Date: 1 May 91 14:58:46 GMT References: <1991Apr30.020847.12423@osh3.OSHA.GOV> Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK. Lines: 70 chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes: > And this in itsself reminds me of the Byte Magazine Summit issue where > they supposedly gathered "experts" to get their opinions on what > computing would do in the next decade. These IDIOTS should have been > ashamed of themselves! They said things like tiny computer chips > implanted under the skin and whatnot. What a joke! > > Enough people would NEVER allow such a thing to happen. I'd bet with > one whif of such a thing the ACLU would go mad, and in this one tiny > case I would support them. Do you mean that you are against implanting computers into the human body in general, or that you are against the specific example of planting chips in people in order to track them? You say that the idea of implanted computers is a joke. Well, I for one would love to have some sort of electronic database / diary / alarm unit implanted; if it had a direct neural connection and allowed me to pull up the information and overlay it over my field of vision, that would be even better. And a neural-connected maths co-processor would be wonderful! I expect a lot of people reading this find the idea disturbing. Well, my point is that you are over-generalizing to say that nobody will allow such things to happen. If you're against implanted *tracking* chips, then the objection is surely a 'civil liberties' one and not a technology-based objection. > The same could be said for a computer > controlled freeway system. One of the best things about driving a car > is "driving the car". People are never going to want to give up the > freedom of controlling the vehicle themselves, and I do mean NEVER! Again, you are overgeneralizing. I would be much happier travelling by car if the car were controlled by a computer system to make it more efficient and safer. I love travelling by train, and trains are completely out of my control. > I know of > NOBODY, including myself, that I would trust to write an application > that had my very life in its hands so completely. I can only assume that you never travel by plane, because modern planes like the 767 are have many vital functions entirely computer-controlled for a large part of the journey. And, of course, the air traffic control systems rely heavily on computerization. > Have you ever of an > application that was completely free of bugs? Have you ever heard of a car that was completely free from design defects? It's not the presence of faults which is important, it's their number, and how frequently and severely they manifest themselves. Formal software development techniques are useful in ensuring that faults are acceptably rare and cause the systems concerned to fail in a reasonably safe way. > >How would we combat it? > > Fight it before it IS implemented. What's your alternative? Remember, you can't carry on with everyone owning his own car and driving it himself. Your state will be probably be paralyzed by the end of the century if you do. mathew -- mathew - mathew@mantis.co.uk or mcsun!ukc!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew