Message 04283 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT02590 Message: 29/37 L1 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Graham Seaman * Technology and Society (was: [ox-en] Conference documentation / Konferenzdokumentation)



Technology and Society
======================

Graham Seaman [graham at seul.org]

URL: http://opencollector.org/Whyfree/Technology/Slides/index.html

Philosophers have interpreted technology. Some of them have even
criticised it. But if the point is to change it, what changes should
be made and how? Can the story of free software suggest how general
changes in technology can be made? Or can critical theories of
technology suggest which direction free software should take?

The non-critical view
=====================

'The form of made things is always subject to change in response to
their real or perceived shortcomings, their failure to function
properly. This principle governs all invention, innovation and
ingenuity... Since nothing is perfect .. everything is subject to
change over time'

(Petroski, the Evolution of Useful Things, 1993)

The Whig view of technology: everything is always changing for the
better. Start from DOS and you will inevitably pass through Windows
2K; Moore's law is a law.

** Unable to import figure Seaman01.png **

** Unable to import figure Seaman02.png **

Left Critic: Marx
=================

Criticism limited to technology in production

o    Knowledge sucked from worker into machinery

o    Technology embodies worker's knowledge and science

o    Worker becomes 'living appendage' of machine

Phases:

o    Initial optimism: Paris Manuscripts to Grundrisse. All become
     scientific generalists.

o    Deep pessimism:

'This specialisation in passivity, i.e. the abolition of
specialisation itself as specialisation, is what characterises machine
labour. Improvements within the mechanical workshop itself are aimed
at removing as far as possible all the skills which have again grown
up on its own basis. It is therefore completely simple labour, i.e.
uniformity, emptiness and subordination to the machine.'

(Marx, 1861 Manuscripts
[http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/economic/ch35a.htm])

o    Defeat. We must pass through purgatory to reach heaven, where
     automated slaves do the real work; and we have plenty of spare
     time to compose symphonies.

The path of technology is just as determined as for the non-critical
view - but now (alienated) reason is imposed by capital. Since the
designers/inventers/programmers who implement the machines are
invisible ('numerically unimportant'... 'insignificant'...), there is
no human agency to disturb the process.

Right critics: stage 1
======================

Practical criticism: Cobbett, Ruskin, Thoreau ...

** Unable to import figure Seaman03.jpg **

** Unable to import figure Seaman04.jpg **

NB. illegal to make candles at home at this time

Strategy: remove dependence on factory work and factory products by
restoring and creating home-based production.

Right critics: stage 2
======================

The pessimists: Heidegger, Tolkien, Ellul

Nature as 'standing reserve'

** Unable to import figure Seaman05.jpg **

** Unable to import figure Seaman06.jpg **

The Entwives gave their minds to the lesser trees, and to the meads in
the sunshine... they did not desire to speak with these things... the
Entwives ordered them to grow according to their wishes, and bear leaf
and fruit according to their liking; for the Entwives desired order,
and plenty, and peace (by which they meant things should remain where
they set them).

(J.R.R. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings (1954)

o    Man as ordered by technology:

'Technique must reduce man to a technical animal, the king of the
slaves of technique. Human caprice crumbles before this necessity;
there can be no human autonomy in the face of technical autonomy.'

(Jaques Ellul, The Technological Society, 1954)

o

** Unable to import figure Seaman07.jpg **

'[By] the Machine (or Magic)...I intend all use of external plans or
devices (apparatus) instead of development of the inherent powers or
talents - or even the use of those talents with the corrupt motive of
dominating: bulldozing the real world, or coercing other wills. The
Machine is our more obvious modern form, though more closely related
to Magic than is usually recognized ... The basic motive for magia ...
is immediacy: speed, reduction of labour and reduction also to a
minimum (or vanishing point) of the gap between the idea or desire and
the result or effect.'

J.R.R. Tolkien, Letters (1951/4)

Technology's direction is fixed in advance by Reason. And it is a bad
direction. Pessimism or mysticism are the only alternatives ...

The bicycle story
=================

** Unable to import figure Seaman08.jpg **

** Unable to import figure Seaman09.jpg **

'The 'working' of a machine is not an intrinsic property of the
artefact, explaining its success; rather it should figure as a result
of the machine's sucess'

Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs (1995)

If 'working' is redefineable, technology does not have a single
predetermined path

Alternatives
============

o    William Morris: self-expression through production

o    Gilbert Simondon: technology, not work, as mediator between man
     and nature

o    Ivan Illich: convivial technology

o    Science, Technology, Society (STS)

Common element: restore human control over technology. Requires both
openness and involvement.

'A truly technological machine is an open one, and the ensemble of
open machines presupposes man as permanent organiser, as living
interpreter of machines both in themselves and in relation to other
machines. Far from being overseer of a gang of slaves, man is the
permanent organiser of a society of technical objects which need him
as musicians need a conductor... So man's function is to become both
coordinator and permanent inventor of the machines around him'

Simondon, Du mode d'existence des objets techniques (1958)

All caught on the 'how' question:

o    Morris: after the revolution

o    Simondon: through education

o    Illich: as the revolution

o    STS: democratic control

What 'works'?
=============

Politics in a post-industrial society must be mainly concerned with
the development of design criteria for tools rather than as now with
the choice of production goals

(Ivan Illich, Tools for Conviviality)

The Lucas Plan shopping list:

1.   The process by which the product is identified and designed is
     itself an important part of the total process.

2.   The means by which it is produced, used and repaired should be
     non-alienating.

3.   The nature of the product should be such as to render it as
     visible and understandable as possible while compatible with its
     performance requirements.

4.   The product should be designed in such a way as to make it
     repairable.

5.   The process of manufacture, use and repair should be such as to
     conserve energy and materials.

6.   The manufacturing process, the manner in which the product is
     used, and the form of its repair and final disposal should be
     ecologically desireable and sustainable.

7.   Products should be considered for their long-term characteristics
     rather than short-term ones.

8.   The nature of the products and their means of production should
     be such as to help and liberate human beings rather than
     constrain, control and physically or mentally damage them.

9.   The product should asssist cooperation between people as
     producers and consumers, and between nation states, rather than
     induce primitive competition.

10.  Simple, safe, robust design should be regarded as a virtue rather
     than complex 'brittle' systems.

11.  The product and processes should be such that they can be
     controlled by human beings rather than the reverse.

12.  The product and processes should be regarded as important more in
     respect of their use value than their exchange value.

13.  The products should be such as to assist minorities,
     disadvantaged groups, and those materially and otherwise
     deprived.

14.  Products for the Third World which provide for mutually
     non-exploitative relationships with the developed countries are
     to be advocated.

15.  Products and process should be regarded as part of culture, and
     as such meet the cultural, historical and other requirements of
     those who will build and use them.

16.  In the manufacture of products, and in their use and repair, one
     should be concerned not merely with production, but with the
     reproduction of knowledge and competence.

But how?

Free software -> technology
===========================

o    Change from inside: not external democratic control, not waiting
     for revolution

o    Product not a commodity

o    Product essentially open

o    Why here?

     o    Software (include bio-informatics, books, music...)

     o    Radio hams

     o    Psychotropics

('Rather than present this field as a magic act, the sources of
lysergic acid materials in nature shall be detailed and their mystery
removed')

Is it making at home?

But:

o    Jet Engines

o    Bootstrap: Machine tools

o    Scanning tunneling microscope

Almost (no ICs) anything... (but why no precision plastics!?)

Need 'makeability': continuity through raw materials to modular blocks
plus culture - valid alternative definition of 'works' available at
start

Electronics
===========

Semiconductor technology does not work any more!

o    Silicon wafers not 'makeable', though potential culture was
     there:

'The rules were different in the 1960s ... trying to hold back the
spread of information ... felt unsporting ... scientists threw their
employers secrets across the table as casually as they would pay for a
round of drinks.'

(Inside Intel, Tim Jackson)

o    Transistors allow modular designs: hi-fi culture, radio hams,
     etc. But makeability stuck around 1962 or so

** Unable to import figure Seaman10.jpg **

o    Small ICs allow modular designs: Homebrew Club, early PCs

o    Large ICs limit makeable modular designs

o    FPGAs allow modular designs. But the underlying technology is
     still not makeable, and allows commercial interests to block full
     development of free designs

o    Lee Felsenstein: go backwards. Really??

o    Maybe organic transistors? Grow plastics (in the LSD fields?)?
     Trade area for speed? Print circuits with inkjets? Reintroduce
     makeability?

But ... where are the polymer people?

Suppose this works: ecological problems immediately become obvious.
Who decides how urgent they are?

Technology -> Free software
===========================

Any reverse lessons?

o    Development process does not separate user from producer (singly
     free software?)

o    Modular designs, made of composable elements (OpenOffice?)

o    Working not hidden from end user (is usability magic?)

If all the office workers of the world used Star Office instead of
Word, what would have changed?

Books and Links
===============

Books
-----

o    William Cobbett: Cottage Economy (1822)

o    Martin Heidegger: The Question Concerning Technology (1953)

o    J.R.R. Tolkien: Lord of the Rings (1954)

o    Christopher Tolkien: The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien

o    Jaques Ellul: The Technological Society (1954)

o    Gilbert Simondon: Du mode d'existence des objets techniques
     (1958)

o    Victor Papanek: Design for the real world (1971)

o    Ivan Illich: Tools for Conviviality (1973)

o    Mike Cooley: Architect or Bee? (1980)

o    Wiebe E. Bijker: Of Bicycles, Bakelite and Bulbs (1995)

o    Andrew Feenberg: Questioning Technology (1999)

Links
-----

o    Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology
     [http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/]

o    (Somewhere on the net): Uncle Festers guide to practical LSD
     manufacture


_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de



Thread: oxenT02590 Message: 29/37 L1 [In index]
Message 04283 [Homepage] [Navigation]