Society and Information Technology in Second Life

Wednesdays, January 9 - July 30, 2008, 4-6, SLT/PT, 7-9 pm ET

on Berkman island in Second Life - http://slurl.com/secondlife/Berkman/114/70/25

Course homepage - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com

 

Instructor: Scott MacLeod (not on Harvard's faculty) = Aphilo Aarde (in Second Life)

http://scottmacleod.com/papers.htm

 

 

April 2 2008 Soc and Info Tech class transcript - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com/

 

[15:57]  You: Hello Jayne

[15:57]  Jayne Urqhart: Hi there

[15:58]  Jayne Urqhart: Me too :)

[15:58]  You: Glad you've come

[15:58]  You: to this course

[15:58]  Jayne Urqhart: am I early?

[15:58]  You: People will be here shortly

[15:59]  Jayne Urqhart: k, feel like a nerd, except that I'm not in the front row

[15:59]  You: What are your particular interests in Information Technology, besides Second Life?

[16:00]  Jayne Urqhart: well, I'm an information professional/researcher

[16:00]  Jayne Urqhart: I am working on a few IT projects connected with education in RL

[16:00]  Jayne Urqhart: I am also exploring options in SL for future work

[16:00]  Claryssa Schmidt is Online

[16:00]  Jayne Urqhart: excellent

[16:00]  You: We look at how ways in which information technology has pervaded every aspect of socioeconomic processes.

[16:01]  You: What are some of those projects?

[16:01]  Jayne Urqhart: one of them concerns medical education and measuring impact of information retrieved and delivered

[16:01]  You: As I may have mentioned

[16:01]  You: . . . .if you'd care to share?

[16:01]  You: the course wiki is here - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com

[16:02]  Jayne Urqhart: another is related to collaboration between business people and resarchers in a collaborative effort to explore an eBook

[16:02]  You: and I've been posting the transcripts.

[16:02]  You: Hi Claryssa.

[16:02]  Jayne Urqhart: yes, just browsing through

[16:02]  Momi Despres is Online

[16:02]  Claryssa Schmidt: hi

[16:02]  Boston Hutchinson is Online

[16:03]  Claryssa Schmidt: hi Boston

[16:03]  You: We began with the actors, key innovations, and geography that lead to the IT revolution.

[16:03]  You: Hi Boston.

[16:03]  Boston Hutchinson: Hi everybody.

[16:04]  You: ... focusing particularly on the consequences of three innovations - the microprocessor, telecomminications, and computing.

[16:04]  Jeande Laville is Offline

[16:06]  You: And this course starts with the argument that there's a paradigm shift, as signficant as previous industrial revolutions that were based on synergies betwen more material processes - steam, energy, metals,

[16:06]  Momi Despres is Offline

[16:06]  SamBivalent Spork is Offline

[16:06]  Jayne Urqhart: our materials tend to be less 'tangible' these days

[16:06]  You: chemicals, early telecommunications.

[16:06]  You: I'm experiencing some lag here, unfortunately.

[16:06]  Jayne Urqhart: yet no less powerful

[16:07]  You: Yes

[16:07]  You: It's particularly interesting when people contribute their specific or general knowledge

[16:08]  You: to this course, and type chatting offers a way for all of us to contribute at once.

[16:08]  Jayne Urqhart: oh yes. may I ask what the composition of your class is like?

[16:08]  You: The wiki is perhaps a useful resource for that - but please - what questions do you have?

[16:09]  You: :)

[16:09]  Boston Hutchinson: Hi RAin

[16:09]  You: Hi Rain.

[16:09]  Rain Ninetails: hi!

[16:09]  You: So, in this course I suggest that

[16:09]  SamBivalent Spork is Online

[16:10]  You: 1) this IT revolution is about information generation and processing

[16:10]  You: these 5 aspects are very significant to the paradigm shift to the paradigm shift that is occurring

[16:11]  You: 2. that it's pervasive, invades, and influences every domain of socioeconomic action

[16:11]  You: 3. it's characterized by networking, of companies, people, and mentalities

[16:11]  You: 4. it's main quailty is flexibility, where the system is such that it can reorganize and reprogram components without disintergration

[16:11]  You: The internet itself is infinitely extensible, and new software and technologies can be added as they develop.

[16:12]  You: This is very different from almost all previous technologies.

[16:12]  You: so and 5. technological convergence occurs in an intergrated system, which is opening, not closing, and which is only bound by technological development

[16:13]  You: So, this evening, we'll continue to examine noopolitik, which can be generally contrasted with realpolitik, that ultimately resorts to a pragmatic use of force.

[16:13]  You: Noopolitik, generally speaking, is a kind of information politics in a very broad sense

[16:14]  You: And it's had numerous impacts that emerge with the development of information technologies.

[16:14]  You: And last week, we looked at a number of them

[16:14]  You: including the dramatic transformation in warfare in the last 30 years

[16:15]  You: transcripts are on the wiki

[16:15]  You: .... that now there are 2 kinds of

[16:15]  You: wars - instant wars and wars of poor countries

[16:16]  You: and that what has emerged is a new kind of politics

[16:17]  You: Another key change relating to IT has stemmed from the very transformation of the technologies themselves

[16:17]  Jeande Laville is Online

[16:17]  You: where war in part has taken shape in cyberpsace as well as in RL

[16:18]  You: where hackers have penetrated other nation's computers as a kind of war strategy

[16:19]  You: So, that's where we left off last week

[16:20]  You: There are a number of fascinating examples of hacking as a form of warfare, just as IT was becoming widespread in the mid-1990s.

[16:20]  You: ... and when security issues were very new, vis a vis national interests

[16:20]  Boston Hutchinson: New case in the news today: Somebody in China is attacking web sites relates to Tibet.

[16:21]  You: Exactly . . . and because security developments and protocols are being wrtten as we talk, many

[16:22]  You: developing countries are a some risk.

[16:22]  Patrio Graysmark is Online

[16:22]  You: ..because they don't have programmers to write these programs themselves with national interests in mind.

[16:23]  Michele Mrigesh is Online

[16:23]  Jayne Urqhart: so in a way, also a knowledge revolution

[16:24]  You: So those countries that have the resources and universities to generate programmers area at a distinct advantage.

[16:24]  Persis Trilling is Offline

[16:24]  Rain Ninetails: :)

[16:24]  You: What was signficant in the mid 1990s with IT and war in cyberspace, though, amounted to

[16:24]  You: Hello Andormeda!

[16:24]  Boston Hutchinson: Hi Andromeda.

[16:24]  Andromeda Mesmer: Hi everybody - new viewer & getting used to it.

[16:25]  You: a propaganda war, where casualities didn't occur.

[16:25]  You: More significantly, though, is that with computing technologies, everything depends on the ability to disrupt networks.

[16:26]  You: This becomes essential, and by the same token, the ability to protect networks is essential.

[16:26]  You: So one of the highest priorities in the case of war in the IT revolution is to protect or attack computer systems around the world.

[16:27]  Sunnyk Noyes is Offline

[16:27]  You: 1) firewalls

[16:27]  You: and 2) procedures

[16:27]  You: The US defense department keeps building defenses around computers in the form or

[16:27]  You: But as Lawrence Lessig said, given all these protections, we should be well protected.

[16:28]  Jayne Urqhart: 3) personnel background checks?

[16:28]  Rain Ninetails: :)

[16:28]  You: But as we've observed before TCP?IP - transmission control protocol - information protocols - which is the system of protocols that were written

[16:29]  You: in the mid 1970s were designed around an open architecture

[16:29]  You: TCP / IP are still the underlying protocols, and while networks can be designed more securely

[16:29]  You: they are still built on this system -

[16:30]  You: Windows OS, by comparison, is constantly adding new security measures, so it isn't easy to make entirely secure networks.

[16:30]  You: Many MIT undergrads could well hack existing networks,

[16:31]  You: so Lessig is righ, but not because we're not skillful enough.

[16:31]  You: The problem is the network - there's always a backdoor.

[16:31]  You: A Network is only as strong as its weakest link.

[16:31]  You: What's the way to make computers more secure?

[16:31]  You: Widespread encryption capacity.

[16:33]  You: And we, the public, don't have this because the government has been scared.

[16:33]  You: The notion here is that the entire system is built on insecure communication - and that a secure system is impossible

[16:33]  You: because it only takes time to crack.

[16:34]  You: So you still cannot control the internet

[16:34]  Andromeda Mesmer: IIRC, the guy who invented PGP was charged with exporting munitions? The US govt. was scared of people outside the US having PGP.

[16:34]  You: although it's gotten more secure since the first graphical browsers emerged in the 1990s

[16:34]  You: Exactly

[16:35]  You: Boston - I know you don't study secutiry issues, but would you agree that there is always a back door in a network

[16:35]  Andromeda Mesmer: Absolutely -- either built in, or can be discovered.

[16:35]  You: that makes networks impossible to make secure.

[16:36]  Boston Hutchinson: I think so, at least in the sense that if you can figure out the structure of the messages, you can fake anything.

[16:36]  Andromeda Mesmer: And here is always good ole social engineering.

[16:36]  You: You can control access to the server and so what you've got is code and countercode

[16:36]  Boston Hutchinson: Then, if you can figure out the machine languages of the routers and computers you want to attack, you can doi anything they can do.

[16:37]  You: - and in that you can't competeley control a network's security, and will not be able to for the foreseeable future.

[16:37]  Andromeda Mesmer: I have been told that it is surprising what you can find in paper trash cans.

[16:37]  Boston Hutchinson: But you might have a lot of trouble decoding encrypted passwords, which might be necessary to attack more secure systems.

[16:37]  Jayne Urqhart: but the flip side of this is that there are jobs and progress

[16:37]  You: You have an ongoing race with more attempts at broadening encryption technologies to shpae kinds of networks.

[16:38]  You: Thanks, Boston . . yes Jayne

[16:38]  Boston Hutchinson: There must be a very large DOD budget for this, but it gets very little publicity.

[16:38]  You: But in terms of warfare and national interests, this is not very

[16:39]  You: .... not nearly secure encough

[16:39]  You: So the way, for example, to control the cracking computers of the Pentagon, is to impose huge penalties.

[16:40]  You: And huge penalites do not a secure system or network make

[16:40]  You: Is the Defense Department less secure because they have computers?

[16:41]  You: and gaining access to communications is a real threat - so

[16:41]  Andromeda Mesmer: If they have OLD systems, they may actually be more secure, in that there are fewer people who know how those operate --

[16:41]  Boston Hutchinson: I suspect a major part of security depends on detecting attacks,tracing them, and surveilling the attackers quietly.

[16:41]  You: the main threat is not to get secrets, but to make the netowrk less functional

[16:42]  You: Everything in a computer can be retrieved out of a computer

[16:42]  Daisyblue Hefferman is Offline

[16:43]  You: ... where the guy working from home is still a threat.

[16:43]  You: And that continues to be a very insecure process.

[16:43]  You: So the real threat is not from armies but from terrorists, in a network society.

[16:43]  Jayne Urqhart: an army of one

[16:43]  You: And terrorism and anti-terrorism become critical matters ...

[16:44]  You: and anti terrorism questions center on intelligence and surveillance

[16:44]  You: It's literally impossible to contrl deep rooted terrorism

[16:44]  Andromeda Mesmer: or control bored teenage geniuses with too much time on their hands.

[16:44]  You: Ultimately, one person, ready to die, and holidng a bomb wanting to do so, can ...

[16:45]  You: Today, a pocket nuclear bomb in a breifcase is possible

[16:45]  You: A few years ago, a student at MIT, showed how

[16:45]  You: And there is wide spread smuggling of plutonium in the world

[16:46]  You: The entire anti-terrorist policy is based fundamentally on counter-terrorism prevention

[16:46]  You: to catch a person BEFORE they carry out an act of terrorism

[16:47]  You: It's an absolutely new dimension of warfare that in contrast battles of past centuries have not dealt with

[16:47]  You decline Book Island Beach discussion are, Book Island (199, 43, 23) from A group member named faeryraindancer Ninetails.

[16:47]  Diego Ibanez is Online

[16:48]  You: especially for most terrorist groups

[16:48]  Jeande Laville is Offline

[16:48]  You: Nuclear terrosim, though, is not nearly as signficant as biological terrorism,

[16:49]  You: - potentially, as a threat -

[16:49]  SamBivalent Spork is Offline

[16:49]  You: because the ability to engage in nuclear terrorism on a wide spread basis is still small

[16:50]  You: But as one form of warfare, easily targetting by terrorism, what is more signficant today is the threat of biological terrorism.

[16:50]  You: Because we don't know how to contain it

[16:50]  You: and * if someone does it, others will do it, as well.

[16:51]  You: Nuclear war was predicated on the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction MAD

[16:52]  You: But with biological warfare, the main thing that's difficult to contain, is that states and nations do generate these materials - they do biological warfare.

[16:53]  You: And chemical warfare requires local chemical plants

[16:53]  You: So, by and large in terms of warfar politics

[16:53]  You: *warfare

[16:53]  You: biological warfare is a very big risk, and is still being developed.

[16:54]  You: The ideal instrument for a suicidal terrorist with a huge cost would be the ability to trigger an epidemic in a whole city.

[16:54]  You: POINT - Another key point in terms of warfare and noopolitik

[16:54]  Michele Mrigesh is Offline

[16:55]  You: So, the goal is to prevent biological terrorism

[16:55]  You: Although we've ony looked at the genetic revolution very briefly here, as an aspect of the IT revolution,

[16:56]  You: biological warfare is perhaps the biggest threat.

[16:56]  Kid Kuhn is Online

[16:56]  Boston Hutchinson: We seem to assume that terrorists are willing to cause as much damage as possible; that they operate without ethical constraints.

[16:57]  You: Yes, Boston, perhaps, but planning how to prevent a worst case scenario, that is realistic, probably can not take into consideration the possible ethics of a terrorist

[16:57]  You: What do you think?

[16:57]  Boston Hutchinson: I think it might actually be the key to the problem.

[16:58]  You: Perhaps - but 911, as an example, does suggest (?) that risks are real. And the point here is to observe how warfare

[16:59]  You: in this class on warfare and noopolitik

[16:59]  Dnate Mars is Offline

[16:59]  You: is new vis-a-vis information technology

[16:59]  Boston Hutchinson: There are rules for symmetrical warfare. Are there no rules for asymmetrical warfare?

[16:59]  Dnate Mars is Online

[17:00]  You: I think the argument that terrorism is a significant risk, using any possible modality, suggests the parameters of some milirary analyses risk

[17:00]  ThePrincess Parisi is Offline

[17:00]  You: and the parameters of assymmetrical warfare.

[17:01]  You: Hello LifeFactory!

[17:01]  LifeFactory Writer: I am so sorry I came in late to this event...sounds like you are on an extremely interesting topic!

[17:01]  Brian Whiteberry is Online

[17:01]  LifeFactory Writer: Hello! :)

[17:01]  You: Glad you came - I'm going to post the transcript from the first half of class

[17:02]  LifeFactory Writer: Wonderful! Thank you. Apologies for the lateness.

[17:02]  You: to http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com

[17:02]  You: before we take a break

[17:03]  You: Let's come back in ten minutes and we'll continue to look at some implications of the information technology revolution, warfare, and noopolitik

[17:03]  You: I'll post the transcript right now.

[17:03]  You: See you in 10 minutes.

[17:03]  Andromeda Mesmer: Fridge, here I come!

[17:03]  LifeFactory Writer: Great!

[17:03]  You: :)

[17:03]  Boston Hutchinson: It's dishwashing time for me. :)

[17:04]  Jagger Valeeva is Online

[17:04]  Luna Bliss is Offline

[17:05]  LifeFactory Writer: Actually, I was not aware this is an ongoing course...how great is that! But, where in the cycle have I come in?

[17:06]  You: transcript is posted - check out the wiki to see where we are in the course - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com - see you in 7 minutes.

[17:07]  LifeFactory Writer: good grief...the course is half over! :D Pity for me!

[17:09]  Michele Mrigesh is Online

[17:09]  Second Life: Information and updates about in world services can be found on the blog @ http://blog.secondlife.com  Article: Various Issues

[17:11]  LifeFactory Writer: Hi Movies :)

[17:11]  Sonja Strom is Offline

[17:11]  Movies1963 Beck: hi how are you?:)

[17:12]  LifeFactory Writer: Very well, thank you! You too?

[17:12]  Boston Hutchinson: Hi. Just got back.

[17:12]  Movies1963 Beck: not bad thank you, where you on vacation?

[17:12]  LifeFactory Writer: Cannot believe I just learned about this course. Have you been coming?

[17:12]  Boston Hutchinson: The course is described on the wiki--I think we're on week 13 out of 16

[17:12]  Movies1963 Beck: no I just heard about this

[17:12]  LifeFactory Writer: Not really vacation, but I have been gone from SL, mostly, since middle of Jan.

[17:12]  Movies1963 Beck: it wasnt listed in the events search where it should have been

[17:13]  Movies1963 Beck: did you go to thLifeat meeting yesterdat

[17:13]  LifeFactory Writer: I WILL give you the link to the wiki for this, which also has the transcript from this class posted...hang on.

[17:13]  Movies1963 Beck: did you go to that congressional hearing life?

[17:13]  You: Hi Movies

[17:13]  LifeFactory Writer: http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com look under "recently added" for today's transcript.

[17:14]  Movies1963 Beck: hi

[17:14]  Rain Ninetails: :)

[17:14]  You: Hello Everyone.

[17:14]  LifeFactory Writer: No I did not; after this, please tell me about it.

[17:14]  You: I don't think 16 weeks will be long enough, so I think I'll continue to explore some issues vis-a-vis the IT revolution beyond 16 week.s

[17:15]  Rain Ninetails: :)

[17:15]  LifeFactory Writer: I cannot believe I missed this. I will read the whole wiki tonight!

[17:15]  LifeFactory Writer: *school

[17:15]  You: Another key point conerning Information technology, International relations, Warfare, and Noopolitik

[17:15]  You: :)

[17:15]  LifeFactory Writer: ARe you with the ANnenberg schook, Aphilo?

[17:15]  You: concerns the notion of anti-missle defense technology.

[17:16]  Andromeda Mesmer: Back in 2 minutes.

[17:16]  You: These are issues I study and have taught in SL and real life before

[17:17]  You: This island is Harvard, and I've taught through various institutions, but I'm not on the Harvard faculty.

[17:17]  LifeFactory Writer: I see. THank you. Please, is there a Q session at the end of the class?

[17:18]  You: Yes, and please ask questions, and engage generally and specifically throughout the class - type chat allow sfor people to talk when they want - and I think this adds to this conversation.

[17:18]  LifeFactory Writer: VEry good. THanks.

[17:19]  Jon Seattle is Offline

[17:19]  You: I will, however, continue to examine the issues we've been developing in this course . . . which focuses the conversation . . .

[17:20]  LifeFactory Writer: Actually, I am kind of interested in something I read in the transcript that yu said earlier in the class, regarding propaganda wars on the internet and "nobody getting hurt." Do you feel that is still the case given today's internet propaganda wars and their parallels on the ground?

[17:20]  You: I also welcome people who would like to make presentations about issues that they are particuarly knowledgable about

[17:20]  You: vis-a-vis the IT revolutioin.

[17:21]  LifeFactory Writer: So, no talking about my two headed pet frog, I take it ; )

[17:21]  You: People haven't get physically hurt as far as I know. misinformation, the disruption of netowrks (the biggest concern) and stealing of secrets

[17:22]  You: are forms of risk.

[17:22]  You: :)

[17:22]  You: .... and involve kinds of damage.

[17:22]  Jayne Urqhart: e-stalking, identity theft

[17:23]  Boston Hutchinson: On propaganda wars--Is there an equivalence of some sort between physical harm and the effects of propaganda? Is meme damage a real injury in some sense? Isn't loss of time and money comparable to physical injury also in some way?

[17:23]  You: Yes ..ture, I've been focusing on IT issues vis a vis warfare, in particular

[17:24]  LifeFactory Writer: Are you familar with the online media networks of the jihad groups and the nexus between these and actions on the ground in say Iraq and Afghanistan? I can give you a reference to a very good study by Radio Free Europe if this is something that may interest you.

[17:24]  LifeFactory Writer: It would speak to your question too, Boston.

[17:25]  You: Yes, Boston, but many of the changes in warfare that we've been focusing on revolve around mortality questions.

[17:25]  LifeFactory Writer: I do not want to divert your class, apologies if it seems so.

[17:25]  You: Mortality in warfare has dropped signifcantly in the past 30 years

[17:26]  You: And the nature of warfare has changed dramatically ....

[17:26]  Boston Hutchinson: But only, I think you pointed out earlier, in wars in developed countries.

[17:26]  You: Perhaps this is only temporary

[17:27]  You: Yes, wars in poor countries continue to be long drawn out cruel processes.

[17:28]  Boston Hutchinson: The experts on war seem to understand them only after they are over. I'm not sure we can do any better, but it sure is interesting to try.

[17:28]  Geda Hax is Online

[17:29]  You: and extrapolate to the future,

[17:29]  You: Yes, it would be great to see how the inforamtion technology revolution has changed the nature of warfare

[17:29]  You: but predicting the future is impossible

[17:29]  LifeFactory Writer: I think there are some who would already argue that the so-called "frontline" in today's wars are not on the ground at all.

[17:30]  You: History and trends sometimes seem indicative. . .

[17:30]  You: yes, LifeFactory - (Please do read the transcript from the first half of class and last week)

[17:30]  LifeFactory Writer: I just did.

[17:31]  You: Concerning the notion of anti-missile defense

[17:31]  You: which are attempt at designing laser directed weapons

[17:31]  You: that can prevent against any missile attack

[17:32]  You: This is pure fiction

[17:32]  You: There is no such thing as a missile shield

[17:32]  Veeyawn Spoonhammer is Offline

[17:32]  You: While the Reagon administration did establish technological superiorty over the Soviet Union, it didn't develop an- ant-missile system

[17:33]  Boston Hutchinson: I havent heard of "laser-directed" anti-missle weapons. There are laser weapons and anti-missle missles as separate categories.

[17:33]  You decline THE DISTILLERY - 1930's Style/Music , Rich Idiot (208, 204, 22) from A group member named Erik Silverstar.

[17:33]  Boston Hutchinson: Probably neither works yet.

[17:33]  Veeyawn Spoonhammer is Online

[17:34]  You: That administration did shift major strategic warfife to an ability to destruct system, based on the premise of

[17:34]  You: laser systems

[17:34]  You: But these were programs to set up missile warfare against communication systems

[17:35]  You: So up until now we've looked at

[17:35]  You: 1) the direct effects of technology on warfare and geopolitics

[17:35]  You: and 2) Geopolitical challenges within new paradigms.

[17:36]  You: What I'd like to look at now is th eshift in military tactics from battlelines to netowrk warfare.

[17:36]  You: The terminology the Pentagon uses is "network centric warfare"

[17:37]  You: And the implications for this have to do with security threats to this country

[17:37]  You: from confrontations between big countries

[17:37]  You: to small threats

[17:37]  LifeFactory Writer: small threats with large consequences.

[17:37]  You: If there is a threat, imediate devastation within a few hours to a few months can entail.

[17:38]  You: So major powers are now reluctant

[17:38]  You: to exterminate to the end

[17:38]  You: because, since the Cold War, and the doctrine of MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction - upon which

[17:39]  You: And this gets military planners crazy.

[17:39]  You: is a threat to everyone.

[17:39]  You: Nuclear warfare is predicated

[17:39]  You: ... because no one can win

[17:40]  matrix05 Infinity is Offline

[17:40]  You: (sorry , Im experiencing a little lag, and my sentences are coming out a little out of order)

[17:40]  Jeande Laville is Online

[17:40]  You: So a new idea emerges:

[17:41]  You: How to do actual serious warfare on a limited small scale, where small confrontations are decisive?

[17:41]  You: So this lead to a network oriented strategy

[17:42]  You: *leads

[17:42]  You: 1) based on communication

[17:42]  You: 2) intelligence

[17:42]  You: and 3) small units that can inflict devastating damage

[17:42]  You: and 4) satellites

[17:42]  You: and this is called swarming

[17:43]  You: which includes small autonomous units relying on communications in real time.

[17:43]  You: They know where they are and what they want to do

[17:43]  You: and the enemy doesn't know anything

[17:43]  LifeFactory Writer: Very brazen of China to shoot down a satellite a few months ago, no?

[17:44]  Boston Hutchinson: I think there was an example in the recent attack on the Mehdi Army in Basra. Our side had the network technology, but appears to have lost the battle anyway.

[17:44]  You: In this network centric strategy, big aircraft carriers, big tanks are history - leading to the possibilty of no battalions and no armies

[17:44]  You: yes, LifeFactory

[17:44]  You: Interesting, Boston,

[17:45]  You: Old forms of warfare are still planned for . . . but these undergo change, as well

[17:45]  You: And the IT revolution signficantly shapes these developments.

[17:45]  You: So in swarming

[17:45]  S2ur8viv5et9he Dayafter is Offline

[17:46]  You: tanks are sitting ducks for helicopters and planes

[17:46]  Arawn Spitteler is Offline

[17:46]  You: and mobile units of very fast mechanized vehicles - the marine corps are being reorganized aournd the network model

[17:47]  You: so flexiblility becomes key in another way, lessening the significance of size

[17:47]  You: And in the most advanced models, you have infestation teams

[17:47]  You: to inflict major hits to communication stations.

[17:47]  Boston Hutchinson: So this technique depends on having information, but sometimes there's no network inside the battle space, especially if it's indoors and among populations we don't understand.

[17:48]  You: All is kind of a commando model

[17:48]  You: Yes, boston, but the main idea is that these units - and indeed this whole new way of warfare - depends on the Internet

[17:48]  Brian Whiteberry is Offline

[17:48]  You: and very reliable intranets in the small groups

[17:49]  Boston Hutchinson: There was a contract awarded recently to iRobot for small mesh-network robots.

[17:49]  You: They have to know exacty where they are, what they are doing

[17:49]  You: and all is technology driven

[17:49]  You: Robots are becoming signficant

[17:50]  You: but one main point here is that decision making moves to the network, and away from the hierarchy - the chain of command

[17:50]  You: becasue the small unit has real time information and communicating with a command center might put at risk the lives of the people in the intranet

[17:51]  You: and this will have a dramatic effect on the nature of warfare and planning for it.

[17:51]  Boston Hutchinson: I think Centcom thinks they're using the network to control the battle directly from far away.

[17:51]  You: Interesting -

[17:51]  You: So all of this is technology driven

[17:51]  Diego Ibanez is Offline

[17:51]  You: And the armed services may need more sophisticated soldiers

[17:52]  LifeFactory Writer: Boston, can you please elaborate on what you meant here? "I think Centcom thinks they're using the network to control the battle directly from far away."

[17:52]  You: to step up at recruitment ceneters in the US and in Universities

[17:53]  Geda Hax is Offline

[17:53]  You: So the Internet originally emerged from military funding, but with no specific use planned - a remarkable situation

[17:53]  You: but now there is a use and the Internet is essential to this

[17:53]  Boston Hutchinson: The networks transmit a detailed map of the battlefield resources, friend and foe, to Central Command, which can then make decisions from a great distance.

[17:54]  You: So, I'll close here . . . and let's chat for awhile

[17:54]  Boston Hutchinson: Satellite, local network, images taken on the field and from aitrcraft are all synthesized into a map of the battle space at Centcom.

[17:54]  You: If decisions are being made in really time by small units, there's very little time for command centers to make reasoned decisions.

[17:55]  Jagger Valeeva is Offline

[17:55]  Rachel Breaker: wait

[17:55]  You: So those people on the ground in the unit will begin to make many more of the decisions.

[17:55]  LifeFactory Writer: eject the greifer.

[17:56]  Rachel Breaker: meat makes vehicles that go r fast

[17:56]  You: Sorry about that

[17:56]  Veeyawn Spoonhammer is Offline

[17:56]  Arawn Spitteler is Online

[17:56]  You: Are there questions, observations, before we close?

[17:57]  You: So let's close here.

[17:57]  You: Next week, we'll continue to examine

[17:57]  Geda Hax is Online

[17:57]  You: Information technology, International relations, Warfare, and Noopolitik

[17:58]  You: and soon move on to the future of the Internet.

[17:58]  Kid Kuhn is Offline

[17:58]  You: I'll begin to lay out how the course will proceed after the weeks I've outlined ahead.

[17:59]  LifeFactory Writer: I am so excited! Wish I had known from the beginning. Is this really open to anyone? Is there a fee? Registration? etc?

[17:59]  You: Thank you for coming - the wiki is here - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com - and I'll post the transcript

[17:59]  Jayne Urqhart: thank you very much, Aphilo

[18:00]  You: I'll invite you to the group list momentarily . . .

[18:00]  Claryssa Schmidt is Offline

[18:00]  You: I'm interested eventually in teaching this class over numerous semester - equivalents

[18:01]  LifeFactory Writer: Do you mean in an actual classroom? Are you prototyping the course here in SL?

[18:01]  You: in Second Life - but right now I welcome at large participation

[18:01]  Andromeda Mesmer: Aphilo -- I'd like to add something about a previous subject we discussed -- there is a fellow who is trying to create an AI -- a tiger IIRC -- in SL. I'll try to find out more.

[18:02]  You: No - this classroom is good - I'd like to use video streaming as well, but type chat has many advanatges

[18:02]  Andromeda Mesmer: The creator might be interested in joining the group, depending on his schedule and time zone.

[18:02]  You: in that everyone can participate and we can even record multiple lines of reasoning . . .

[18:02]  LifeFactory Writer: Is there any consideration of conducting this in voice?

[18:03]  You: Yes, please Andromeda

[18:03]  You: Send me some URLs etc

[18:03]  You: Not everyone has a voice enabled machine

[18:03]  Andromeda Mesmer: LifeFactory, I will tell you what a German friend told me about voice.

[18:03]  Andromeda Mesmer: No way -- her accent is bad, and she prefers to type.

[18:04]  LifeFactory Writer: Aphilo, I feel like you should sit on something so that you are not orbited.

[18:04]  Andromeda Mesmer: It also makes those with hearing impairments not able to partici[ate.

[18:04]  LifeFactory Writer: Understood, Andromeda.

[18:04]  Andromeda Mesmer: But the Accent -- that problem gets eliminaed completely.

[18:04]  Daisyblue Hefferman is Online

[18:04]  You: And type chat, athough slow, does create a trasncript that is a form of knowledge production potentially through conversation in its own right

[18:05]  LifeFactory Writer: VEry good point, Aphilo.

[18:05]  Andromeda Mesmer: Heck - I have trouble with the accents of Floridians from the central rural part of the state.

[18:05]  You: so I welcome your thoughts and ovservations, as well as questions, but I'll continue to

[18:05]  Boston Hutchinson: I find typing much easier when not communicating in my native language. It's easier to look up a word if necessary.

[18:05]  You: focus on many of the themes of this course that I have planned ahead.

[18:06]  You: Yes, Boston . . . lots of new possibilities in this new technology of a virtual world . . .

[18:06]  jeanrem Beebe is Offline

[18:07]  You: I'm also quite interested in using these technologies to engage a fairly academic analysis of the information technology revolution

[18:07]  You: where words are perhaps the best mode for communication

[18:08]  Andromeda Mesmer: Possibilities -- eventually I think, big conferences. Scientific and engineering socieities could meet here nicely, once the size problem is solved.

[18:08]  You: So, thank you, - I'll post the transcript

[18:08]  LifeFactory Writer: Thank you so much.

[18:08]  Boston Hutchinson: Thanks, Aphilo!

[18:08]  You: Yes, Andromeda - so many opporutnieis here - and these would signifcantly save costs . . .

[18:08]  You: See you next week

[18:09]  You: thanks for coming . . .

[18:09]  LifeFactory Writer: Good bye, All. Enjoy the day/evening.

[18:09]  Rain Ninetails: :)

[18:09]  Perry Proudhon is Offline

[18:09]  Boston Hutchinson: Bye

[18:09]  Andromeda Mesmer: Bye, Aphilo.

[18:09]  You: Bye

 

April 2 2008 Soc and Info Tech class transcript - http://socinfotech.pbwiki.com/