Re: from the horse's mouth

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 29 okt 2005, at 15.40, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

>>
>> Amorality among scientists, engineers, and technologists has
>> gotten the
>> world into a lot of trouble.  I prefer to think about the
>> consequences
>> of what I do.
>>
>
> I think we all do, and I think it's one of the reasons why I felt
> Jefsey's accusations of provinciality and blinkeredness to be
> deeply insulting as well as incoherent.

FWIW, I agree completely with Harald's sentiment.

I am not sure what he did other then send 2 pointers to articles.
Don't quite understand how this might be insulting.

Sigh. Obviously Harald isn't referring specifically to the message that started
this thread, but rather to the numerous messages Jefsey has posted previously
on this and other lists. (My records indicate he has posted well
over 200 messages this year to the LTRU list, over 100 to the ietf-languages
list, and over 200 more to the main IETF list from jefsey@xxxxxxxxxx alone -
and he appears to use several other addresses as well.)

I do think there are two interesting questions:

- is the IETF community interested in discussions about the social
implications of the technology we develop

As I pointed out in my previous response, if you mean do we have to consider
the societal implications of the things we develop, we have no choice if we
expect our technology to be useful and effective. It is simply not possible to
do the stuff we do correctly in a vacuum.

Now, if you're instead referring to discussing these implications independently
of the work we do and with no intention of having the outcome of those
discussions inform our work in any way, then while I guess it is fine to have a
separate list for this purpose, I see little point in it. (Perhaps this is the
sort of thing Brian meant to say was out of scope in his original response. If
so, I'm somewhat more sympathetic to his position.)

- is the IETF general list the right place for those discussions.

It depends. I don't think the posting that started this thread was appropriate
or relevant; the only reason I joined in was to support Steve Bellovin's
assertion that such issues actually do play a vital role in what we do here.

OTOH, when someone points out a serious mismatch between how something
is designed and how something is going to be used during a last call, not
only is that completely appropriate for the main IETF list, hearing such
comments is essential.

I for one am interested in the topic  and think it is important for
any tehcnological group to take a view of its social responsibility.
But i am not sure that this list is the right place - though I don't
mind since I can skip threads that don't interest (or bother)  me,
but experience shows that not everyone is able to do so.  and to some
people the topic is irrelevant.

So perhaps an ISOC list, or a specific IETF social issues list would
be better.  At least on such a list everyone would be participating
willingly.

Again, having such a list is fine, but it cannot be a subsitute for considering
the societal context of the work we do as we do the work.

				Ned

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]