Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 05:07:06 GMT
From: The Wolfe of the Den <news@wolves.durham.nc.us>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Technophiliacs - cont.
Reply-To: news@wolves.durham.nc.us
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 103, Message 4 of 7

In <comp-privacy1.102.9@pica.army.mil> DRWIER@SCSMTA.SWITCH.CH (DRWIER) writes:
>No, technophiliacs is not a joke.  It is an attempt to become
>aware of the "hidden side effects" of all technology on both
>a personal as well as social level.  I'm not anti-technology.

	I can see that you consider this a serious condition, but I was
one of the ones to ask if this was serious, since the way it was written
and some of the item you mentioned as examples have a style and effect
very similar to some fairly classic satire of technology articles that
have been seen by quite a number of folks who watch this sort of
question as an avocation or profession.

	Allow me to say that I have my doubts about your NOT being
"anti-technology".   The whole concept throws such a view on technology
that it really can't be seen as anything but anti-technology by some
points of view.

>IMHO we have to SLOW down A LOT, and get away from the details,
>and get away from the technology we create to get a more global
>and balanced and more humane perspective.
>Or are there other ways?  

	It is my opinion that there are folks who react to technology
the way that you are outlining, but that is certainly not the only way
that folks react to technology.  There are folks who use the technology
with a great deal of fear or distrust, and some who won't use the
technology at all if it can be avoided.  And then there are those who
seem to take all the technology in stride.  I have seen some folks who
will react to a new piece of technology with an "interesting" reaction -
they look at the new technique or tool, evaluate it very quickly, and
decide whether or not it is immediately applicable to the stuff they are
doing currently.  If it is, they start using it, if it isn't they note
the fact that they've seen this technique for possible future reference.

	Toeffler's "Future Shock" has, IMO, turned out to be rather an
overrated malady.  Certainly, some folks show all the classic symptoms,
and the culture is suffering an effect, but it is not nearly as
pronounced as was once feared.  But I don't recall if it was predicted
that some folks would find a way to deal with the phenomenon.  I think
that some folks have found a way to function fully and balancedly to
technology, but they aren't being noticed and the techniques they use to
cope aren't being studied or taught to enough other folk.

	To tie this into computer/social privacy:  One of the main
(negative) impacts on privacy is the inclusion of personal data into
computer systems, without adequate means of checking the accuracy or for
correcting errors in that data.  Folks have proposed some sort of
legislative remedy for this situation, but they haven't come up with any
really workable plan that isn't more obnoxious that the current
situation.
	Perhaps some of these meta-stable individuals could be convinced
to serve as arbitrators/ombudsmen for auditing/correcting data in all
the various databases out there?
-- 
Usenet Net News Administrator @ The Wolves Den  (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
news@wolves.durham.nc.us  news%wolves@cs.duke.edu  ...duke!wolves!news
"The flame war is a specific Usenet art form." --me
[This site is not affiliated with Duke University. (Idiots!) ]