Approved-By:  "EDTECH Moderator" <21765EDT@MSU.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edtech
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 01:01:11 EDT
From:         Gleason Sackman <sackman@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject:      Conference Report, Part 3 of 4 (fwd)

Forwarded message:
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 09:31:52 CDT
xFrom: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS@uhupvm1.bitnet>
Subject:      Conference Report, Part 3 of 4

From: Steve Cisler <sac@apple.com>
Subject: Conference Report, Part 3 of 4

Computers, Freedom, and Privacy-2: A Report
Steve Cisler

Thursday 9 a.m.

For Sale: Government Information

This was staged as a role playing advisory panel where a grad
student made a broad and complicated request for information in a
particular format. The panelist made short statements about their
interests and then tried to answer the pointed questions from George
Trubow of John Marshall Law School.

Freedom of Information Act

Dwight Morris LA Times: his job is to get govt. data and turn it into
news stories. The FOIA is a joke; it's a last resort. Vendors are foia-
ing the agencies and then trying to sell those foia requesters software
to read the data tapes!

Ken Allen of the Information Agency Association said the govt.
should not elude the appropriations process by selling information,
nor should the agency control content. The IIA is against exclusive
contracts.

Mitch Freedman,Westchester Co. Library  ALA Coordinator for
Access to Information.  Are many people asking for access for this
information, or will the coding benefit many users in the long run?
He mentioned of WINDO program, freedom of access, and its link to
informed democracy.

Franklin Reeder, Office of management and Budget

Unusable databases in raw form means that choice of format is
irrelevant. there may be broader demand for this info, and the
database should be provided with interfaces for many users.

-Govt. agencies should not turn to info provision for revenues; it
becomes an impediment to access. "I don't think the public sector
should be entrepreneurial. "

-
Costin Toregas, Public Technology, Inc.--owned by cities and counties
in U.S. and Canada.

 We should re-examine our language when discussing information
and access. -How do you recover the costs of providing the new
technological access mechanisms. The provision of this should be
high priority.

Robert Belair, Kirkpatrick and Lockhart, deals in FOIA and privacy
issues. Choice of format is an issue, and in general we are doing a
bad job.  Belair notes that FOIA requests are not cheap.  There are
$2-4,000 fees from government agencies--even more than the lawyer
fees!

Questions:

Denning: no view of where technology is taking us. Why not put the
information online? Freedman says the Owens bill handles this.

Weingarten says that one agency is planning for a db that has no
equipment to handle it yet. Belair: we will get change in FOIA and
the Owens bill is good.  Toregas: A well-connected community  is
crucial.

Harry Goodman asked Ken Allen if he still believed that "libraries be
taken off the dole." He denied theis but Goodman had it on tape!
Allen said privatization is a red herring. Govt. agencies might not be
the best way to provide the access to information.  Allen says it
should be by diverse methods.

Glenn Tenney, running for Congress in San Mateo County (CA), said
he had trouble getting information on voting pattern of the members
of Congress and to buy it would have cost thousands of dollars paid
to a Dutch company (Elsevier). Ken Allen replied that a private
company had developed the information from raw material, but
others thought this was basic information that should be available to
all citizens. Other people wanted the Congressional Records online
(and cheap); others wanted the private sector to do it all and to get
the government to partner in such projects.

Free Speech and the Public Telephone Network

At this point in the conference people had made contact and were
meeting in the halls, ignoring some of the main sessions. The activity
was split between the ballroom and the halls. A good sign of a vital
conference.

Jerry Berman of the EFF:  Do telcos have the right to publish over
their own networks? What are the implications of telcos as
newspapers vs. telcos as common carrier? But are not safeguards
needed to compel free access for all players? There is already
discrimination on the 900 services (provision or billing for porno
businesses).  When the public finds out what is on the network, there
will be a big fight. Will we follow the print model or the broadcast?
How can a new infrastructure secure a diversity of speech and more
participants, and how can break the deadlock between cable, papers,
and telcos.

Henry Geller, Markle Foundation (FCC/NTIA) Free speech and the
public telephone network.  Key is the common carrier nature of the
telephone and that they should carry all without determining what is
appropriate.  Congress can't chose between warring industries, so it
won't act on some of these telecomms issues.

Broadband area: if the bits flowing are TV programming, the telco is
forbidden to provide.  Print model is a good one to follow, not the
cable or broadcast model. He mentioned  CNN's squelching of NBC
cable channel.

John Podesta (Podesta Associates)   There are forces that are trying
to push messengers off the road and keep the network from being
diverse.  We need a network with more voices, not just those of the
owners.  We will be faced with censorship by the govt. and network
owners (MCI, US West); there will be more invasion of privacy

Six things have to happen:

1. More competition via open platform. Personal ISDN at low
tariffs.

2.structural safeguards

3. common carriers should be content neutral when providing access

4. originators should bear responsibility for obscene or salacious
postings.

5. protect net against invasion of privacy. Debate is whether it will be
easier or harder to wiretap in the future.

6. Don't adopt broadcast or cable model for network; both are more
restrictive with regards to First Amendment issues.

Bob Peck (ACLU)

Government  ban on RBOCs providing information is a first
amendment issue, but there is also an issue of access. How do we
make sure that everyone gets charged the same rates.

He cautioned that the Rust vs. Sullivan decision could affect network
use; abortion clinics could not answer any questions about the topic.
US Govt claimed: "We paid for the microphone; we just want to be
able to control what is said." This is being argued in other cases by
DOJ  and should be resisted.

Eli Noam (NYU)

Coming from state govt. I tried to be an oxymoron, a forward
looking state utility commissioner. Telcos say: if anyone can use the
common carrier, why not themselves. Free speech is rooted in the
idea of scarcity and restraints to access. When you have 9000
channels, who cares? there will be no scarcity. He predicts people will
be video literate. Video will have new obscene phone calls.

New issues:

%We are over optimistic about the short term and too cautious about
long term effects. Telecommuting is happening.  We will have
telecommunities, subcultures of interest. Our political future is based
on jurisdiction. Is there a new form of political entity emerging that
transcends time zones. Groups are stratified by work or profession.

%Information glut: key issue will be how you filter and screen it.
Handling the information will be a big issue.The user's brain is the
ultimate bottleneck.  Internet news is about 18 mb a day.   Screening
will be by the network itself or by user groups and telecommunities.

%rights of individuals vs. the governments. Is the first amendment a
local ordinance?

%We need power over international interconnection. Fly the flag of
teledemocracy.

Questions: Geller thinks the states can be more innovative.

In discussing public access cable he noted that 5% of the cable
revenues went into city coffers not the channel.

Bruce Sterling, author of The Difference Engine (with William
Gibson) and a new title, The Hacker Crackdown, gave an
outstanding performance/speech entitled "Speaking the
Unspeakable" in which he represented three elements of the so-
called computer community who were not at CFP-2: the truly
malicious hacker, a narco-general who has discovered the usefulness
of his contacts with the North American law enforcement
communities--and their databases; and a data pirate from Asia. This
was a hilarious, yet half-serious departure from the usual fare of
conferences and is well worth obtaining the audio or video cassette. I
also recommend you attend the American Library Association
conference in late June 1992 when Sterling will address the LITA
attendees.

Who's in Your Genes was an overview of genetic data banking, and a
discussion of the tension between an individual's right to privacy and
the interests of third parties. DNA forensic data banks and use of
genetic records by insurers will be explored. Panelists included Phil
Reilly, Shriver Center for Mental Retardation; John Hicks, FBI Lab;
Tom Marr, Cold Spring Harbor Lab; Paul Mendelsohn,
Neurofibromatosis, Inc.; Peter Neufeld, Esq.; Madison Powers,
Kennedy Center for Ethics, Georgetown University.

Part 3 of 4


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gleason Sackman, Coordinator               Internet: sackman@plains.nodak.edu
Technical Operations                       Bitnet:   sackman@plains.bitnet
SENDIT Project                             701-237-8109
NDSU Computer Center                       Fargo, ND  58105
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU