%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % Forum for Academic Software Engineering % % (The Electronic Version) % % % % Volume 2, Number 5, April 16, 1992 (FASE No. 6) % % % % _____________________________________________________________________ % % % % 1 Workshop Announcement--Cleanroom Engineering % % % % 2 Software Management Conference: Defining the Gray Zones in % % Software Copyright % % % % 3 New Design Standards % % % % 4 A Little Humor % % % % 5 Electronic Frontier Foundation % % % % 6 Extensive Computers & Society Material From UC Irvine % % _____________________________________________________________________ % % % % % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 1====================================1====================================1 From: Jeff Lasky Subject: Workshop Announcement--Cleanroom Engineering CALL FOR PARTICIPATION CLEANROOM ENGINEERING WORKSHOP May 31 - June 4, 1992 Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester, NY Sponsored by the National Science Foundation Undergraduate Faculty Enhancement Program The purpose of this workshop is to provide undergraduate teaching faculty with an intensive exposure to the cleanroom engineering method of software development. The workshop is offered to faculty who will typically have at least five years of undergraduate teaching experience. Funds will be provided to cover lodging and meal costs during attendance at the workshop. In addition, participants are eligible to receive a $250 stipend. (Employees of the federal government are not eligible for any financial support). It is expected that the faculty member's home institution will provide travel funds. The workshop begins on a Sunday so that participants can take advantage of discount airfares. There is no workshop fee. Interested faculty should e-mail the application form to jal@cs.rit.edu or to JALICS@RITVAX. Applications will be processed as received until available workshop places are filled. Cleanroom Software Engineering Overview: Cleanroom software engineering places software development under statistical quality control for ultra-high-quality software with high productivity. In the Cleanroom process, test teams are responsible for certifying the quality of software, not for debugging quality in, an impossible task. Development team are responsible for producing zero/near-zero defect software for quality certification. Such development performance depends on rigorous specification and design techniques, and powerful function-theoretic correctness verification in place of unit testing and debugging. Cleanroom code undergoes first execution by test teams in statistical usage testing for quality certification in the system environment. Cleanroom teams in industry and government are achieving remarkable quality results. Course Outline: The first day of the course introduces Cleanroom principles and technologies, including box-structure specification, function-theoretic verification, and statistical usage testing, as well as the Cleanroom management process of incremental user-function development. It also reviews actual Cleanroom experience to date, including quality results achieved. The course then continues with an intensive 2 1/2 day study of Cleanroom verification, followed by 1 1/2 days on Cleanroom statistical certification, including discussion of how these topics can be taught in a semester-long undergraduate software engineering course. Participant Benefits: Opportunity to review cleanroom engineering results which demonstrate that development of zero-defect software is an achievable industrial target. Instruction in fundamental Cleanroom principles and technologies, and their practical application for real-world software development. Detailed presentation of the Cleanroom verification and certification technology, and how they are taught within IBM. Workshop Leaders: Richard Linger is a member of the Senior Technical Staff of IBM and is the manager of the IBM Cleanroom Software Technology Center. He managed the development of IBM's first commercial Cleanroom product, and has co-authored two software engineering textbooks used in Cleanroom education and technology transfer. Dr. Mark Pleszkoch is a member of the IBM Cleanroom Software Technology Center, specializing in statistical usage testing techniques for software quality certification. He has provided technical leadership on several Cleanroom projects and is currently consulting with Cleanroom teams throughout IBM. APPLICATION Cleanroom Engineering Workshop Name................................Title................................ Address......................................... ......................................... ......................................... ......................................... Work phone............... Home phone............... FAX............... Electronic mail address....................... How many years experience do you have teaching undergraduates?.......... In what area(s) do you usually teach? .................................. ........................................................................ Please state your motivation for attending the workshop: ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Please direct inquiries to the above e-mail addressees or to : Professor Jeffrey A. Lasky, Workshop Director Rochester Institute of Technology Department of Information Technology Rochester, NY 14623 (716)-475-5178 RIT admits and hires men and women, veterans and disabled individuals of any race, color, national, or ethnic origin, or marital status in compliance with all appropriate legislation, including the Age Discrimination Act. The compliance officer is James Papero. 2====================================2====================================2 From: David Casti Subject: Software Management Conference: Defining the Gray Zones in Software Copyright Software Management Conference: Defining the Gray Zones in Software Copyright May 17 & 18, 1992 Contact: Kassia Dellabough 503-346-3537 The University of Oregon will be hosting a Software Management Conference on May 17 &18, 1992 at the Portland Red Lion Hotel - Jantzen Beach. The theme of the conference, software copyright, will address pressing issues in software management and licensing. Information systems managers, lab managers (all levels), system users, and desktop publishers will find this conference of benefit in enhancing their current knowledge of software and copyright laws and clarifying what legal status is. The conference will feature pre-conference sessions Sunday, May 17 for more in-depth exploration of specific issues such as, interpreting site license agreements, System 7 and copyright issues, self audits, scanning, photocopy and the law and managing upgrades. Large and small software companies will be making mini-presentations to clarify licensing agreements. Monday, May 18 will feature general sessions on software development trends, implementing solutions and issues in training site software management and audit analysis. Speakers include; Karen Billings - Claris Corporation, Dave Frohnmayer - UO Law School Dean, Ken King - President Educom, Sharon Tate - Executive Director, National Microcomputer Management Association, Domenick Vetri - UO Law School, Ken Wasch - Executive Director, Software Publishers Association and David Dailey, Williams College. A panel debate between developers and users will be featured and audience participation will be encouraged. For further information please contact conference director: Kassia Dellabough, UO Continuation Center, 503-346-3537, inside Oregon 1-800-824-2714, FAX 503-346-3509 3====================================3====================================3 From: Don Gotterbarn Subject: New Design Standards THE FOLLOWING WAS ON ANOTHER LIST. IT SEEMS TO INDICATE NEW STANDARDS FOR SOFTWARE DESIGN!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is an interesting piece from the March 7, 1992 edition of _The Boston Globe_ (Authored by Ronald J. Ostrow of the _L.A. Times_) HEADLINE: FBI ASKS TECHNOLOGY NOT OUTPACE WIRETAPS Nothing scares me more than our government putting the stop on the development of technology because they can't keep up the surveillance technologies... SUMMARY OF TEXT: Contending that the fast-pace of technology in TELECOMMUNICATIONS is interfering with wiretappng... Hence, they have proposed legislation that would require the TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ensure that the improvements doesn't interfere with the ability to secretly record conversations... The proposed legislation would also require consumers of such technology pay for the cost of developing new and improved surveillance technology and equipment... The list of "consumers" that are targetted to pay for these upgrades includes EVERY TELEPHONE CONSUMER... The FBI cites the potential for criminals to use such technology to conduct their activities and that the FBI needs to have newer technology to intervene via wiretapping. A number of civil liberties and industry leaders, including Marc Rosenberg, Washington Director of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, have criticized the plan. The criticism has targetted the fact that future telephone systems and telecommunications developments will have to be designed with surveillance in mind, placing a chilling effect on all communications, and that the goals of the industry is to develop an inter-connecting communications infrastructure. Another criticism is that the FBI has failed to demonstrate that surveillance abilities are indeed endangered. 4====================================4====================================4 Subject: A Little Humor From: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu (Laurie Werth) Lines: 120 Organisation: STC Telecoms, New Southgate, LONDON UK Here's something for you out in netland, a salutory tale of software development. Note this is not the way things are done here at STC :-; The true story of ??? --------------------- In the beginning there was the Requirement and the Requirement was without form or structure and darkness was upon the face of the Client, and the face of the Client was turned away from the Company. So the Company said : 'Let there be a Tender' And lo, there was a Tender, and the Client saw that it was good, and the face of the client was turned once more unto the works of the Company. Then did the Company gather together all manner of creatures, and from this gathering was created the project team - and it was said that it was good. >From the Project Team were produced Engineers and Programmers and diverse other forms of life. And from the multitude was selected one who was raised above all others and who was called 'Manager'. And he was to lead the Project Team along the path of productivity for the Companys' sake. And it happened that the mind of the Manager was dazzled by the Tender and he thereby believed that all things were possible, even though there was, as yet, no specification. Thus it was that the Manager commanded all Programmers to be gathered together in one place and he spoke to their leader who was called Chief Progammer : 'Let there be a Schedule, whereby I may know the Delivery Date, and I shall make you responsible for the accomplisment of this schedule'. Therefore did the Chief Programmer move amongst his followers and ask of them 'How shall this be done ?'. Where upon his followers withdrew, each to his own desk and estimated, as was their custom. And it came to pass that each Programmer brought forth an estimate and, after much wailing and gnashing of teeth, all estimates were consolidated and summarised into one place which was called a 'Project Plan'. And the Chief Programmer brought the Manager unto the Project plan saying : 'Behold - it will take a full score of months to accomplish'. But the Manager was not pleased and said : 'I have raised you up from the depths and given unto you many coding sheets and even so you have not understood the Tender, your Project Plan is too long'. Whereupon the Manager hired consultants, authorised much overtime and cancelled all holidays. Then he spake unto the Chief Programmer : 'Behold, see all that I have done, the Delivery Date shall be in one Year'. Then did the Chief Programmer set his followers to designing and coding and there were many meetings and much computer time was employed in the working thereof - even though there was as yet no Specification. And it came to pass that the Manager examined the designs and he saw that they were too ambitious and he knew that they could not be accomplished in the Delivery Date. Whereupon the Manager commanded the Chief Programmer to separate the design into two parts. One part he called the 'Manditory Functions' and the other part were 'Options' - and the Client called him names. And the Manager commanded: 'Let the Software Houses put forth their salesmen and let us have a Data Base Management System' and it was so. The salesmen produced all manner of Brochures which laid claim to many and wondrous things - each according to their own file structure. And it came to pass that a Data Base Management System was selected and the Chief Programmer accomplised said that it was good and that more programmers were required if all was to be accomplised by the Delivery Date. Thus it was that the Project Team was increased almost without number. The Manager, espying this host from afar said : 'Let there be Organisation' and there was Organisation. And the Project team was split into many groups that did not speak to each other, and it was said that , perhaps it was good. Some groups the Chief Programmer called Senior Programmers and others he called Junior Programmers and he gave domination to the former over the latter . And the Senior Programmers saw it differently. Now it was said that the Chief Programmer exorted his followers to even greater efforts because the Delivery Date was nigh and the breath of the Manager was hot upon his neck. Both Senior and Junior Programmers became sore afraid. They strove mightily to please the Chief Programmer with much overtime and copious comment and everyone coded and flowcharted, each in his own manner. The manager, seeing this, liked it not and commanded : 'Let there be Standards' and there were Stanards but the Programmers liked them not and productivity fell. When he learned of this the Chief Programmer was afaid that he would be cast down from his high place and therefore commanded : 'Let there be Progress Reports' and there were Progress Reports. The Chief Programmer looked at the Progress reports and saw that the Delivery Date would not be met. Therefore, on the tenth month, the Chief Programmer rose up , pressed his suit, shaved his beard and went unto the Manager, grovelling and pointing his fingers and causing much blame to issue forth unto all manner of creatures who sold both hardware and software. And the Chief Programmer asked for an extension whereat the Manager was exeedingly angry and caused doubt to be cast on the legitimacy of the Chief Programmers ancestors - even to the third and fourth generation and there was much beatin, of breast and tearing of hair - mostly the Chief Programmers'. And the Manager commanded the Chief Programmer to put forth all Software House personnel and all Consultants. But the Chief Programmer refused saying that all were needed, that there was no documentation and that there was, as yet, no specification. And it came to pass that an extention was granted and the Chief Programmer returned to his followers bearing these tidings and there was rejoising and revelry among the terminals; and the coffee machine broke down. On the twentieth month the Chief Programmer said : ' Let the modules be integrated, one with another, so that the system testing can begin'. And it was so and great difficulties were experienced and many hours of overtime were employed in finding out why the modules would not integrate - for there was no documentation and, as yet, no specification. Then on the twenty fourth month, the Chief Programmer did go to the Manager and say unto him : 'Behold I give you good tidings of great joy for you and for youre Client, for on this day the System did work'. And suddenly there was all about them a host, a multitude of Salesmen praising the Chief Programmer and singing : 'Glory to the Company, the Manager, and the Chief Programmer and, please, can you make this small change ?'. And the Chief Programmer rose up and spake thus unto them : 'We dare'nt for there is no documentation and, as yet, no specification'. Graham Bardsley, STC Telecommunications, Oakleigh Road South, New Southgate, ...{mcvax}!ukc!stc!eigg!graham London, England. N11 1HB Tel: +44 1 368 1234 x2739 2====================================2====================================2 Subject: Electronic Frontier Foundation From: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu (Laurie Werth) Several people have asked me for more information on the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Here's a copy of their latest online newsletter, which is posted to comp.org.eff.news. It's kind of long and newsletterish, but can skip to the pithiest part, the "UPDATE ON EFF ACTIVITIES," by searching for the string "currently advocating". ---------------- EFF newsletter follows -------------------- ########## ########## ########## | Three Personal Perspectives| #### #### #### | | ######## ######## ######## | THE SUNDEVIL DOCUMENTS| ######## ######## ######## | CPSR'S FOIA Release| #### #### #### | | ########## #### #### | ARE YOU AN INTERNET NERD?| ########## #### #### | Test Reveals Terrible Truth!| | EFF OPENS WASHINGTON OFFICE | | =====================================================================| EFFector Online January 18, 1992 Volume 2, Number 4 | =====================================================================| PIONEER AWARD NOMINATIONS DEADLINE Please note that the deadline for nominating a person or organization for the First Annual EFF/Pioneer Awards will be February 15. The Pioneer Awards will be made on Thursday, March 19,1992 at the L'Enfant Plaza Hotel in Washington, DC, during the Second Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference. Pioneer Awards are for distinguished contributions, innovations, or service in the cause of advancing computer-based communications. Anyone may be nominated for an award, except for EFF Staff members. A nomination form can be found at the end of this issue of EFFector Online. We have already received many nominations, but we need to hear from you. The EFF is looking for the real pioneers. Help us find them. -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- In this issue: "WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO USE A COMPUTER IN A LIBRARY?" LIBERATION TECHNOLOGY THE NET:WHAT'S IT WORTH? SUN DEVIL DOCUMENTS RELEASED WARNING - MICHELANGELO VIRUS (PC) BERMAN TO HEAD NEW EFF WASHINGTON OFFICE UPDATE ON EFF ACTIVITIES ARE YOU AN INTERNET NERD? -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- NET WORK: Three Personal Perspectives on the Uses of the Net [As the creation of the Net goes forward, and many issues of a technical, legal or political nature surface, its easy to forget that the Net is made to be used by people in ways that are neither technical nor political. In various groups over the past few weeks, the question of what the Net is "good for" has arisen in several guises. In this edition of EFFector Online, we present three "answers". The first is from a librarian, the second from a college professor, and the third from an EFF staff member. Every so often, it helps to step back from the wiring, planning, programming, and social engineering and reflect on the ways in which humanity actually uses the tools it creates.] -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- "WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO USE A COMPUTER IN A LIBRARY?" by Jean Polly (polly@LPL.ORG) How does the INTERNET relate to the little guy? [The previous posters] remarks remind me very much of the response I got from computer dealers in 1980 when I was seeking advice about acquiring a computer for public use at my public library. "Why would ANYONE want to use a computer in a public library-- what on earth would they use it for???" was the universal attitude, usually accompanied by a guffaw or two. Undaunted, I pressed ahead and by October of 1981 we had a 48K Apple II+ out where the Masses could touch it. (Now my kid has 48K on his watch...) Ten years later, over 1,500 hours per month are reserved on the seven public computers in our lab. 75% of the use is by adults, although we have a percentage of families engaged in home-schooling their children who also use the lab to advantage. Our clients use the computers and laser printers for everything from resumes to learning desktop publishing. They create church newsletters, learn to use databases, practice languages, print mailing labels. Last year we got an Apple Library of Tomorrow grant, which brought interactive videodisc technology to our small village library. We have just become one of 37 libraries nationally to beta-test the Library of Congress' American Memory Project. This CD-ROM and videodisc archive contains some 25,000 turn of the Century postcard views of American landmarks, rare film footage from the 1901 Pan-American Exposition, audio archives of great American speeches and their text, with photos of the speakers, plus much more. Subsequent volumes will include Civil War photos by Matthew Brady, folk songs from the California gold rush days, oral histories from around the U.S. Everything in the collection is searchable, much is printable. And yes, we hope to offer INTERNET connectivity in our lab sometime in the first half of 1992. FCC and other government regulations strive to protect public interest in, and access to, cable TV, radio, amateur radio and other communications highways; likewise should we advocate public uses of computer technology, and telecommunications. Haven't you noticed that your colleagues and friends are quickly being divided into "who's on email" and "who isn't". Don't you find yourself talking to "connected" colleagues a lot more frequently than your offline friends? This is Not a Good Thing. Institutionally. Nationally. Globally. I have a dream and it's happening right now. Kids talking about their lives, from Moscow to Mexico City, Cupertino to Halifax. People finding out about their similarities rather than focusing on what divides them. All possible on the net. Gee, you don't need the NREN for just Email, I can hear you say. Right. Not for text. What about when it includes video, color photos, multimedia? Gigabits you say. I don't know how much bandwidth I need to my house. In 1980, 48K did all I wanted, now my desktop takes 8 megs of RAM. I used to do this at 300 baud, now 9600 seems slow. You know Warhol's "everyone's famous for 15 minutes?" Once you are into computers you are only satisfied with what you've got for 15 minutes! ("Faster, higher, stronger", the Olympic motto, could be appropriated by how many of us, gazing into our CRTs...) So, to cut to the chase, yes. The little guy not only needs to be informed about What's Going on Out There, but he needs some way to Be Out There. I guess you can either be a signpost, or a roadblock, or line noise. Jean Armour Polly "Don't postpone joy!" Assistant Director,Public Services Liverpool Public Library INTERNET: polly@LPL.ORG -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- LIBERATION TECHNOLOGY Equal Access Via Computer Communication by Norman Coombs (NRCGSH@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU) I am a blind professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.As such I use a computer with a speech synthesizer,and regularly teach a class of students online with a computer conference. Most of these students have no physical handicap. Some, however, are hearing impaired, and others totally deaf. I have team-taught another course at the New School for Social Research, some 350 miles away, with a teacher who is blind and confined to a wheelchair. On the computer screen, our handicaps of blindness and mobility make no difference. One of the courses I teach online is African American history. In that class, some students are White, some Black, others Asian, and still others Native American. Obviously, some of the class members are male and others female. All of these differences, like those of the handicaps described above, become unimportant on the computer screen. It isn't that these characteristics disappear; participants share their identities, views and feelings freely. However, these differences no longer block communication and community. In fact, conference members often feel free to make such differences one of the topics for discussion. A student in my Black history course said that what he liked about conducting a class discussion on the computer was that it didn't matter whether a person was nmale, female, Black, White, Red, Yellow, blind or deaf. His comments were accepted for their own worth and not judged by some prior stereotype. One myth about the computer is that it is cold, depersonalizing and intimidating. When I began using the computer to communicate with students, I had no idea of its potential to change my life and my teaching. First, it liberated me, a blind teacher, from my dependence on other people. I now have all my assignments submitted through electronic mail including take-home exams,and have little need for human readers. Because of this I have become a member of a pilot study using computer conferencing to replace classroom discussion for students in continuing education. Students with a personal computer and modem could work from home or the office. This freed them from the time and bother of commuting and also let them set their own schedule.The conference facilitates genuine group discussion without the class having to be in the same place at the same time. In addition, I find it easy to send frequent personal notes to individual students, giving me more contact with individual students than is usual in a traditional classroom. I find conferencing appeals to three groups. First, the off-campus continuing education students who no longer have to commute. Second, those who had been taking television or correspondence courses. The online experience gives them a means of exchanging information between themselves and their teacher. The third group turns out to be regular day students with scheduling problems. Online is especially valuable for students whose schedules are filled by laboratory courses. Although computer conferencing had obvious benefits for me, I had failed to grasp its significance for disabled students in general. Only when a deaf student joined the class did I realize its potential. This deaf woman said that this was the first time in her life that she had conversed with one of her teachers without using an intermediary. She also remarked that mine had been her most valuable college course because she could share in the discussions easily and totally. Computer conferencing can also benefit people with mobility impairments. They can go to school while they stay at home. The distance involved could be anything from a few miles to all the way across the continent or across an ocean. Students with motor impairments can also use this system. There are a variety of alternate input devices to let motor impaired persons use a computer even though they cannot handle a keyboard. But conferencing liberates more people than the physically disabled. All students became less inhibited in the discussions. Once students got over any initial computer phobia, many found it easier to participate. Where there is no stage then there is no stage fright. While some educators prefer to keep the teaching process academic and objective, others are convinced that students learn more profoundly when they become emotionally engaged in the process. My class underlined this aspect of conferencing. In a discussion on welfare, one woman in her twenties confessed to being on welfare and described her feelings about it. In a Black history course, students described personal experiences as victims of racism. White students admitted to having been taught to be prejudiced and asked for help and understanding. Black students revealed that they had prejudices about various shades of color within their own community. As a teacher, I often felt that I was treading on privileged ground. These were experiences I had never had in the 29 previous years of my teaching career. Computer communications is infamous for people making thoughtless and irresponsible attacks on one another, something known as "flaming". In my experience, happily, there has been almost none of this. First, the teacher has the opportunity to set ground rules and establish a professional atmosphere. Second, a computer conference is different than electronic mail. Once a mass mailing has been sent, it is irretrievable, while the contents of a computer conference are posted publicly for all to see. Most students seemed intuitively aware of the potential for misunderstanding and, before criticizing someone, they frequently asked questions to be sure that they understood what had be meant by the previous author. On very rare occasions I have removed a posting before it was read by most of the class. Usually, I prefer to leave controversial material on the conference and utilize it as a group learning experience. Computer communication has other important implications for both the print handicapped and those with motor impairments. Library catalogs can already be accessed from a personal computer and a modem. Soon, growing numbers of reference works will be available on-line . While the copyright problems are complex, it seems inevitable that large amounts of text material from periodicals and books will also be accessible on a computer network. I still have vivid memories of the first time I connected my computer to a library catalog and found my book was really there. It was only a year ago that I had my first personal, unassisted, access to an encyclopedia. Not only is this technology liberating to those of us who have physical impairments, but in turn, it will help to make us more productive members of society. Not all handicapped persons rush to join the computer world. Indeed, many have become dependent on human support systems. Sometimes, independence is frightening, and handicapped students may need special assistance to get started. Another problem is cost. While the personal computer has decentralized power and is seen as a democratizing force in society, it works mainly for the middle class. Unless there is a deliberate policy to the contrary, such technology will leave the underclass further behind. Visually impaired computer users, at present, have one growing worry. They fear that graphic interfaces and touch screens may take away all that the computer has promised to them. Recently passed federal legislation has tried to guarantee that future computer hardware and software be accessible to all the physically disabled,but there is no real mechanism to enforce this. Besides, voluntary awareness and cooperation by computer providers is a far better approach to the problem. Educom has established EASI to work within the academic community for software access, and it is having an important impact on voluntary compliance. Others believe that adaptive software and hardware can be produced which can adequately interpret graphic interfaces for the visually impaired. Physical disabilities serve as an isolating factor in life. They also create a tremendous sense of powerlessness. Computer communication, however, serves to bring the world into one's home and puts amazing power at one's fingertips. Not only can this empowerment liberate the handicapped to compete in society more equally, but the sense of power changes how one feels about oneself. Finally, I am personally excited about the ability of computer networking to provide more equal access to education and information for many persons with physical disabilities. In the fall of 1991, The Rochester Institute of Technology and Gallaudet University in Washington will conduct an experiment involving two courses: one taught from Rochester and the other from Washington, DC. Students from both campuses will be enrolled in both classes. While some use will be made of videos and movies, class discussions and meetings between a student and a teacher will all be done with computer telecommunications using Internet as the connecting link. Some students will be hearing impaired, and one teacher will be blind. Norman Coombs Professor of History Rochester Institute of Technology One Lomb Memorial Dr. Rochester NY 14623 Email: NRCGSH@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- THE NET:WHAT'S IT WORTH? by Mike Godwin (mnemonic@eff.org) In a recent posting, dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu writes: >There is a lot of interesting talk about national data networks, ISDN, >federally funded networks, etc., but I was wondering how people felt >about its over-all importance in society. What are the practical >purposes of a national network (a terminal in every home) when people >are having a tough enough time keeping up with their mortgage payments? >With millions out of work, millions in fact, illiterate-- aren't there >economic and educational problems that have to be combatted before a >national data network can be seriously considered? There are a lot of answers to this question, and I can allude to only a few of them here. One answer has to do with the implied premise that there are either moral or practical reasons to address our most pressing social problems first, before we deal with public-policy issues that seem less pressing. Is this premise correct? I don't think so, for a couple of reasons. First of all, it does not follow that establishing national public networks entails *not* responding to the nation's economic problems. Surely we can do both. Secondly, there is a lot more consensus (even with all the debate one sees in this and other groups) about how to promote the building of a network infrastructure in this country than there is about such issues as poverty, the homeless, and illiteracy. (The disagreements about network infrastructure tend to be over minor matters, relatively speaking.) Third, getting people online may actually *help* solve the other problems, by allowing more public-policy discussion and more contributions of ideas. It should be noted that networked online communications are unusual among communications media in that they follow a "many-to-many" model (everyone on the "Net" can talk to everyone else, with minimal capital investment), as distinct from the "one-to-many" model (e.g., newspapers, broadcasting, cable) or the "one-to-one" model (telephones). What's more, discussions in this medium can be more discursive and more analytical, since one is not given tight time constraints to compose or reply to arguments, and since one cannot be interrupted. One of the reasons the First Amendment exists is to promote public participation in public-policy issues (such as how to handle poverty, or the homeless). Thus it makes sense to promote an infrastructure that allows for the greatest exercise of First Amendment prerogatives this country has ever seen. Fourth, if we don't consider the policy issues now, it's not the case that these issues will wait until we get around to them. They're being discussed and settled now, and we can't stop the process by not participating. The question is whether we want all the decisions to be made with public input or not. There are other arguments for addressing network policy now, even though we have other problems facing us, and I'm sure other folks will make them. But I have not the least moral qualm in giving attention to network and online-communication policy issues now, since I believe wholeheartedly that communication is part of the solution to all our other problems. -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- SUN DEVIL DOCUMENTS RELEASED The Secret Service's response to CPSR's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request has raised new questions about the scope and conduct of the Sun Devil investigation. The documents disclosed to CPSR reveal that the Secret Service monitored communications sent across the Internet. The materials released through the FOIA include copies of many electronic newsletters, digests, and Usenet groups including "comp.org.eff.talk," "comp.sys.att," "Computer Underground Digest" (alt.cud.cu-digest), "Effector Online," "Legion of Doom Technical Journals," "Phrack Newsletter," and "Telecom Digest (comp.dcom.telecom)". Currently, there is no clear policy for the monitoring of network communications by law enforcement agents. A 1982 memorandum prepared for the FBI by the Department of Justice indicated that the FBI would consider monitoring on a case by case basis. That document was released as a result of a separate CPSR lawsuit against the FBI. Additionally, CPSR has found papers that show Bell Labs in New Jersey passed copies of Telecom Digest to the Secret Service. The material (approximately 2500 pages) also suggests that the Secret Service's seizure of computer bulletin boards and other systems during Operation Sun Devil may have violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 and the Privacy Protection Act of 1980. Two sets of logs from a computer bulletin board in Virginia show that the Secret Service obtained messages in the Spring of 1989 by use of the system administrator's account. It is unclear how the Secret Service obtained system administrator access. It is possible that the Secret Service accessed this system without authorization. The more likely explanation is that the agency obtained the cooperation of the system administrator. Another possibility is that this may have been a bulletin board set up by the Secret Service for a sting operation. Such a bulletin board was established for an undercover investigation involving pedophiles. The documents we received also include references to the video taping of SummerCon, a computer hackers conference that took place in St. Louis in 1988. The Secret Service employed an informant to attend the conference and placed hidden cameras to tape the participants. The documents also show that the Secret Service established a computer database to keep track of suspected computer hackers. This database contains records of names, aliases, addresses, phone numbers, known associates, a list of activities, and various articles associated with each individual. CPSR is continuing its efforts to obtain government documentation concerning computer crime investigations conducted by the Secret Service. These efforts include the litigation of several FOIA lawsuits and attempts to locate individuals targeted by federal agencies in the course of such investigations. Contact sobel@washofc.cpsr.org (David Sobel) -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- BERMAN TO HEAD NEW EFF WASHINGTON OFFICE The Electronic Frontier Foundation today announced the opening of a permanent office in Washington D.C. and named Jerry Berman, former head of the ACLU Information Technology Project, to direct its operations. In announcing the move, EFF President Mitchell Kapor said, "The creation of the Washington office and the appointment of Jerry Berman demonstrates our commitment to build a national organization. It will give the EFF the ability to effectively advocate policies that will reflect the public's interest in the creation of new computer and communications technologies." Jerry Berman, incoming Director of the EFF Washington Office, stated that, "Our goal is to be the public's voice in Washington on these issues, and to help create policies that will maximize both civil liberties and competitiveness in the new social environments created by digital media." "The EFF," Berman continued, "is hard at work developing initiatives that will ensure that all present and future 'electronic highways', from the telephone network to the National Research and Education Network, enhance First and Fourth Amendment rights, encourage new entrepreneurial activity, and are open and accessible to all segments of society." Jerry Berman was until December 1991 director of the ACLU Information Technology Project. Previously he was the ACLU's Chief Legislative Counsel in Washington, D.C. During his career, Mr. Berman has played a major role in the drafting and enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (warrants for national security wiretapping); the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (warrant requirements for new voice, data, video electronic communications); and the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988. Over the last two years, he has spearheaded efforts to establish public access rights to electronic public information. For more information contact: Jerry Berman, Director Gerard Van der Leun Electronic Frontier Foundation EFF 666 Pennsylvania Avenue,Suite 303 155 Second Street Washington, DC 20003 Cambridge, MA 02141 Telephone: (202) 544-9237 Phone:(617) 864-0665 FAX: (202) 547-5481 FAX: (617) 864-0866 Email: jberman@eff.org Email: van@eff.org UPDATE ON EFF ACTIVITIES The EFF, through its headquarters in Cambridge and its newly opened office in Washington, is currently advocating that: *Congress establish an "open telecommunications platform" featuring "Personal ISDN" ; *the open platform be created with legislative safeguards that ensure a level playing field for all those competing in the information services market; *the NREN serve as a "testbed" for new voice, data, and video services that will eventually be offered over our National Public Network; *electronic bulletin boards be afforded the same First Amendment protections enjoyed by other media; *citizens who use computers for communications purposes be afforded the full protection of the Fourth Amendment; *an Electronic Freedom of Information Act be passed that will grant citizens access to the electronic version of public information consistent with the public's right to know; and that *technical means be mandated to insure the privacy of personal communications carried over cellular and other radio-based communications systems. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also a co-sponsor (along with the Consumer Federation of American and the ACLU) and the principal coordinator of the Communications Policy Forum, which is designed to explore the means for achieving the communications goals of consumer organizations. Over 28 consumer groups, from the OMB Watch to the NAACP participate in forum activities. The Communications Policy Forum is funded by foundations as well as a diverse group of computer and communications firms. -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- WARNING - MICHELANGELO VIRUS (PC) Original-Sender: Virus Alert List From: "A. Padgett Peterson" >From all reports this destructive virus is spreading world- wide very rapidly. Unlike the DataCrime "fizzle" in 1989 which contained similar destructive capability but never spread, the Michelangelo appears to have become "common" in just ten months following detection. I have encountered three cases locally in just the last few weeks. Three factors make this virus particularly dangerous: 1) The virus uses similar techniques as the "STONED" virus which while first identifies in early 1988 remains the most common virus currently reported. Since the virus infects only the Master Boot Record on hard disks and the boot record of floppy disks, viral detection techniques that rely on alteration of DOS executable files will not detect the virus. Similarly, techniques that monitor the status of the MBR may only provide users with a single warning that, if execution is permitted to continue, may not be repeated. 2) Michelangelo was first discovered in Europe in mid-1991 consequently many virus scanners in use today will not pick up the virus unless more recent updates have been obtained. 3) Unlike the Stoned and Jerusalem (the most common viruses in the past) which are more annoying than dangerous, the Michelangelo virus will, on its trigger date of March 6th, attempt to overwrite vital areas of the hard disk rendering it unreadable by DOS. Further, since the FATs (file allocation tables) may be damaged , unless backups are available recovery will be very difficult and require someone who is able to rebuild a corrupt FAT (also a very time-consuming process). Fortunately, the Michelangelo virus is also very easy to detect: when resident in a PC, the CHKDSK (included with MS-DOS (Microsoft), PC-DOS (IBM), and DR-DOS (Digital Research) {all names are registered by their owners}) program will return a "total bytes memory" value 2048 bytes lower than normal. This means that a 640k PC which normally returns 655,360 "total bytes memory" will report 653,312. While a low value will not necessarily mean that Michelangelo or any other virus is present, the PC should be examined by someone familiar with viral activity to determine the reason. If the Michelangelo virus is found, the PC should be turned off until disinfected properly. All floppy disks and other machines in the area should then also be examined since the Michelangelo virus is spread in the boot record (executable area found on all floppy disks including data-only disks). Padgett Peterson Internet: padgett%tccslr.dnet@mmc.com -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- ARE YOU AN INTERNET NERD? This quiz is dedicated to all of those people who find themselves constantly roaming the net. Do you leave yourself logged in twenty-four hours a day, even when you're not home? Is your wpm typing speed higher than your IQ? Are you having trouble seeing things at distances greater than 2 feet? Yes, YOU. You know who you are. Ok... shall we begin? Yes? 5 points... (you could've backed out.) Unless otherwise stated, point values are as follows: 2 for (a), 4 for (b), 6 for (c), and 10 for (d). -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) How many valid net addresses do you have? Multiple machines at the same site do not count. ____Internet ____UUCP ____Other public access ____Other ____Bitnet ____Freenet ____Internet BBS ____All seven (2 points each) 2) How many hours did it take for you to create your .sig? a) Huh? b) More than one c) More than five d) I'm still looking for a really funky quote 3) On an average working day, how many email messages do you receive? a) Nobody sends me any mail... snif b) Three, but they're all from Lester in the next cubicle over, because he has nothing better to do c) I can't count that high, I failed calculus d) Don't ask me now, I'm too busy. Send me e-mail. 4) Alright, fess up. Have you ever read alt.sex.bondage just to see what the heck those perverts were talking about? a) Yes, and I'm so ashamed b) Yes, and I'm so embarrassed c) Yes, and would you please explain a few things to me... d) No, never. (10 points. You're lying.) 5) Have you ever met one of your past SO's (significant others) via a computer network? a) No b) Yes, through a newsgroup we both posted on c) Yes, by chatting randomly over the Internet (shame!) d) Yes, by chatting over RELAY 6) Once you've logged onto your system, what do you spend most of your time doing? a) Going through the library system and putting books on reserve b) Reading _Alice in Wonderland_ in the online bookshelf c) Reading the monthly postings on rec.humor.funny d) Writing up stupid quizzes because you've done everything else 7) If someone were to telephone your home at any given moment of the day, what would be the percent chance that your phone would be busy? a) Zero... I've got call waiting b) 25%.... I only dial in from work (Uh, hi, boss) c) 75%.... Duh, so that's why nobody ever calls me d) Zero... My modem has a separate phone line 8) Which Usenet newsgroups do you spend the most time reading? a) The comp. groups... because they're so informative b) The soc. groups.... because they're so multicultural c) The rec. groups.... because they're so diverting d) The alt. groups.... because I don't know what half those words mean 9) What's your worst complaint about having an Internet account? a) I have to pay $5/month for it b) The damn sysadmins won't give me enough quota to hold all my .GIF's c) All those programmers keep tying up the modem lines d) I have to stay in school to keep it 10) Check your watch now. What time is it? a) 10 am... coffee break b) 3 pm.... General Hospital's on c) 12 am... one last login before I hit the sack d) 4 am.... Oh my God, I've got a test tomorrow ALRIGHT, FOLKS. SCORING TIME! 0-25 points: You're not a nerd. Go read a manual or two and come back next year. 25-50 points: You're an up-and-coming Internet nerd. Why don't you telnet over to 128.6.4.8 and play around with the Quartz BBS for a while. 50-75 points: You're a full-fledged Internet nerd. Join the club. 75-100 points: You're an Internet addict. Try going to the library this week, it'll do you some good. 100+ points: You're an Internet obsessive-compulsive. Unplug your computer, go out in the woods for a few days, and relax. Lay back and listen to the birds singing. Clear your mind. And don't forget to unsubscribe yourself from all those lists before you leave. --written by slewis@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Sarah Lewis) in a moment of extreme boredom. Disclaimer: OSU doesn't know I wrote this, and it's probably better that way. Sigh. Time to hit the books.... -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION'S FIRST ANNUAL PIONEER AWARDS CALL FOR NOMINATIONS (Attention: Please feel free to repost to all systems worldwide.) In every field of human endeavor,there are those dedicated to expanding knowledge,freedom,efficiency and utility. Along the electronic frontier, this is especially true. To recognize this,the Electronic Frontier Foundation has established the Pioneer Awards. The first annual Pioneer Awards will be given at the Second Annual Computers, Freedom, and Privacy Conference in Washington, D.C. in March of 1992. All valid nominations will be reviewed by a panel of outside judges chosen for their knowledge of computer-based communications and the technical, legal, and social issues involved in networking. There are no specific categories for the Pioneer Awards, but the following guidelines apply: 1) The nominees must have made a substantial contribution to the health,growth, accessibility, or freedom of computer-based communications. 2) The contribution may be technical, social, economic or cultural. 3) Nominations may be of individuals, systems, or organizations in the private or public sectors. 4) Nominations are open to all, and you may nominate more than one recipient. You may nominate yourself or your organization. 5) All nominations, to be valid, must contain your reasons, however brief, on why you are nominating the individual or organization, along with a means of contacting the nominee, and your own contact number. No anonymous nominations will be allowed. 5) Every person or organization, with the single exception of EFF staff members, are eligible for Pioneer Awards. You may nominate as many as you wish, but please use one form per nomination. You may return the forms to us via email at: pioneer@eff.org. You may mail them to us at: Pioneer Awards, EFF, 155 Second Street Cambridge MA 02141. You may FAX them to us at: (617) 864-0866. Just tell us the name of the nominee, the phone number or email address at which the nominee can be reached, and, most important, why you feel the nominee deserves the award. You can attach supporting documentation. Please include your own name, address, and phone number. We're looking for the Pioneers of the Electronic Frontier that have made and are making a difference. Thanks for helping us find them, The Electronic Frontier Foundation -------EFF Pioneer Awards Nomination Form------ Please return to the Electronic Frontier Foundation via email to: pioneer@eff.org or via surface mail to EFF 155 Second Street, Cambridge,MA 02141 USA; or via FAX to USA (617)864-0866. Nominee: Title: Company/Organization: Contact number or email address: Reason for nomination: Your name and contact number: Extra documentation attached: -------EFF Pioneer Awards Nomination Form------ -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- MEMBERSHIP IN THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION In order to continue the work already begun and to expand our efforts and activities into other realms of the electronic frontier, we need the financial support of individuals and organizations. If you support our goals and our work, you can show that support by becoming a member now. Members receive our quarterly newsletter, EFFECTOR, our bi-weekly electronic newsletter, EFFector Online (if you have an electronic address that can be reached through the Net), and special releases and other notices on our activities. But because we believe that support should be freely given, you can receive these things even if you do not elect to become a member. Your membership/donation is fully tax deductible. Our memberships are $20.00 per year for students, $40.00 per year for regular members. You may, of course, donate more if you wish. Our privacy policy: The Electronic Frontier Foundation will never, under any circumstances, sell any part of its membership list. We will, from time to time, share this list with other non-profit organizations whose work we determine to be in line with our goals. But with us, member privacy is the default. This means that you must actively grant us permission to share your name with other groups. If you do not grant explicit permission, we assume that you do not wish your membership disclosed to any group for any reason. ---------------- EFF@eff.org MEMBERSHIP FORM ---------------<<< Mail to: The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Inc. 155 Second St. #22 Cambridge, MA 02141 I wish to become a member of the EFF I enclose:$ $20.00 (student or low income membership) $40.00 (regular membership) $100.00(Corporate or company membership. This allows any organization to become a member of EFF. It allows such an organization, if it wishes to designate up to five individuals within the organization as members.) [ ] I enclose an additional donation of $ Name: Organization: Address: City or Town: State: Zip: Phone:( ) (optional) FAX:( ) (optional) Email address: I enclose a check [ ]. Please charge my membership in the amount of $ to my Mastercard [ ] Visa [ ] American Express [ ] Number: Expiration date: Signature: ________________________________________________ Date: I hereby grant permission to the EFF to share my name with other non-profit groups from time to time as it deems appropriate [ ]. Initials:___________________________ |====================================================================| | EFFector Online is published by | | The Electronic Frontier Foundation | | 155 Second Street, Cambridge MA 02141 | | Phone:(617)864-0665 FAX:(617)864-0866 | | Internet Address: eff@eff.org | | Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged | | To reproduce signed articles individually, | | please contact the authors for their express permission. | |====================================================================| -- Rita Marie Rouvalis rita@eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation | We make out of the quarrel with others, 155 Second Street | rhetoric, but of the quarrel with Cambridge, MA 02141 617-864-0665 | ourselves, poetry. -- Y.B. Yeats 3====================================3====================================3 Subject: Extensive Computers & Society material from UC Irvine From: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu (Laurie Werth) SYLLABUS COMPUTERIZATION IN SOCIETY -- ICS131 Rob Kling Department of Information and Computer Science University of California, Irvine (September 1989) (rev. 3/91) The readings come from a new book, Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices by Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (eds.) (Academic Press, 1991). I. Sept 27-29: INTRODUCTION TO THE SOCIAL STUDY OF COMPUTERIZATION - Week #1 A. Sept. 27 -- Today we discuss the orientation of this course, the work you will do, and the organization of activities. Reading: 1. "Usability vs. Computability: Social Perspectives Held by Computer Specialists" by Rob Kling. Paper presented at 1989 International Federation Information Process Societies (IFIP) Conference. 2. Introduction to Social Controversies of Computerization. Charles Dunlop & Rob Kling. General Introduction to: Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. B. Sept 29 -- Film: Now the Chips are Down. Distributed through McGraw-Hill Films. II. Oct. 3-5: THE DREAMS OF TECHNOLOGICAL UTOPIANISM -- Week #2 Are we witnessing a "computer revolution" or living in an "information society?" This week we examine some fundamental images about the role of computers in social life. A. Assignment: Oct 3 (written assignment #1 described) B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 1 Introduction to THE DREAMS OF TECHNOLOGICAL UTOPIANISM -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. Berry, Wendell. "Why I Won't Buy a Computer." from What Are People for? Essays by Wendell Berry. North Point Press (1990) Feigenbaum, Edward and Pamela McCorduck. Fifth Generation: Artificial Intelligence and Japan's Computer Challenge to the World. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1983. Excerpts: Prologue, Experts in Silicon, Section 7 (Speculations in Knowledge Futures), Epilogue. Kling, Rob and Suzanne Iacono "Making a Computer Revolution" -- Journal of Computing and Society 1(1):43-58. Sculley, John -- "The Relationship Between Business and Higher Education: A Perspective on the Twenty-first Century." Communications of the ACM 32(9) (September 1989):1056-1061. III. Oct 10-12: THE ECONOMIC AND ORGANIZATIONAL DIMENSIONS OF COMPUTERIZATION - Week #3 This week we will examine how computer technologies shape and are shaped by organizations. Organizations, such as IBM, DEC, Honeywell and Apple, are the primary vendors of computing equipment and it is difficult to understand the behavior of the computer industry without some insight into the internal dynamics of organizational life. Organizations are still the primary consumers of computer-based products, and it is also difficult to understand computerization without some insight into the dynamics of organizational life. We will examine principles of organizational behavior, and then examine computerization in light of them. A. Assignments: Oct 10 (written assignment #1 due); Oct 12 (written assignment #2 described) B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 2 Introduction to "THE ECONOMIC AND ORGANIZATIONAL DIMENSIONS OF COMPUTERIZATION" -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Baily, Martin Neal. "Great Expectations: PCs and Productivity" PC Computing 2(4) (April 1989): 137-141. Feder, Barnaby J. "Getting the Electronics Just Right: Wells Fargo is a Case Study in How a Company can Exploit the Information Revolution." New York Times, Business Section, Sunday, June 4, 1989: pp 1,8. Miller, Michael J. "PCs and Productivity: Where's the Payoff?" Infoworld 11(38) (Sept 18, 1989), pp59, 62. Rule, James and Paul Attewell. "What Do Computers Do?" Social Problems 36(3)(June 1989):225-241. Salerno, Lynne. "Whatever Happened to the Computer Revolution?" Harvard Business Review 63(6) (Nov./Dec. 1985):129-138. Kling, Rob. "Social Analysis of Computing: Theoretical Orientations in Recent Empirical Research". Computing Surveys 12(1)(1980):61-110 (excerpt, Section 2) IV. Oct 17-19: COMPUTERIZATION AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF WORK - Week #4 Computerization is a complex social and technical process for making social activities depend upon computers. How does computerization alter the character of office life and jobs in offices? A. Assignment: Oct 19: Assignment #2 due B. Film: "Computers in Context" from California Newsreel in San Francisco, Ca. (Oct 17). C. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 3 Introduction to COMPUTERIZATION AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF WORK -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Bullen, Christine and John Bennett. "Groupware in Practice: An Interpretation of Work Experience" [original article] Guiliano, Vincent. "The Mechanization of Work" Scientific American 247 (September 1982), pp. 148-164. Kling, Rob and Suzanne Iacono ``Office Routine: The Automated Pink Collar" IEEE Spectrum (June 1984):73-76.] V. Oct 24-26: COMPUTERIZATION AND SCHOOLING -- Week #5 [NOTE: This section no longer appears in Computerization & Controversy] To what extent do computerized instructional systems or management systems offer significant possibilities for improving what students learn in school? Why have the dreams of some advocates of instructional computing not borne much fruit so far? A. Readings: Draft of Computerization and Controversy -- Introduction to COMPUTERIZATION AND SCHOOLING -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from draft of Computerization and Controversy. Garfinkel, Simson L. -- A Second Wind for Athena: The Experiment Scheduled to Finish in 1988 in Some Ways Just Beginning. The Best of Technology Review 1989. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. pp. 27-31. Kling, Rob -- Commentary: The New Wave of Computing in Colleges and Universities: A Social Analysis. SIGCUE Outlook 1986 pp.8-14. Schank, Roger. Excerpt from The Cognitive Computer by Roger Schank. Reading, Addison-Wesley Publishing: MA. 1984, pp. 200-212. Tucker, Marc -- Computers in the Schools. Speech given by Marc S. Tucker in January 1985 to the Association of American Publishers at their Annual Meeting in Ryetown, New York. 1985 pp. 76-93. VI. Oct 31 - Nov 2: SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS IN ELECTRONIC COMMUNITIES -- Week #6 Does the sue of electronic communication -- such as electronic mail and conferencing -- alter social relationships? If so, how, for whom, and under what conditions? A. Midterm: B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 4 Introduction to SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS IN ELECTRONIC COMMUNITIES -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Peter J. Denning, "A New Paradigm for Science". American Scientist, Vol. 75 (November-December, 1987), pp. 572-573. James R. Beniger, "Information Society and Global Science". The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol 495 (January, 1988), pp. 14-28. Sara Kiesler, Jane Siegel, and Timothy W. McGuire, "Social Psychological Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication". American Psychologist, Vol, 39, No. 10 (October, 1984), pp. 1123-1134. Judith A. Perrolle, "Conversations and Trust in Computer Interfaces". Original manuscript prepared for Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. Fred W. Weingarten and D. Linda Garcia, "Public Policy Concerning the Exchange and Distribution of Scientific Information". The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol 495 (January, 1988), pp. 61-72. Lindsy Van Gelder, "The Strange Case of the Electronic Lover: A Real-Life Story of Deception, Seduction, and Technology". Ms., Vol. XIV, No. 4 (October, 1985), pp. 94, 99, 101-104, 117, 123, 124. VII. Nov. 7-9: SOCIAL CONTROL AND PRIVACY -- Week #7 Does the use of computerized communication and information systems often lead to "invasions of personal privacy"? What do "matching," "profiling," and "fair information practices" mean in the context of computerized technologies and privacy? A. Assignment: Nov 7: Written assignment #3 described. B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 5 Introduction to SOCIAL CONTROL AND PRIVACY -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Roger C. Clarke, "Information Technology and Dataveillance", CACM, Vol. 31, No. 5 (May, 1988), pp. 498-512. Rob Kling, "Value Conflicts in EFT Systems" Excerpted from "Value Conflicts and Computing Developments: Developed and Developing Countries". Telecommunications Policy 1983, 7(1) March, pp. 12-34. Kenneth C. Laudon, "Comment on 'Preserving Individual Autonomy in an Information-Oriented Society'". In Lance J. Hoffman et. al. Computer Privacy in the Next Decade, New York: Academic Press (1980), pp. 89-95. Richard P. Kusserow, "The Government Needs Computer Matching to Root Out Waste and Fraud", CACM, Vol. 27, No. 6 (June, 1984), pp. 542-545. Privacy Protection Study Commission, Personal Privacy in an Information Society. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (1977), excerpts from pp. 3-37 [with footnotes deleted]. Evelyn Richards, "Proposed FBI Crime Computer System Raises Questions on Accuracy, Privacy . . .", The Washington Post, February 13, 1989. [Posted on RISKS-FORUM Digest, Vol. 8, No. 27 (February 16, 1989).] RISKS contributions by Martin Minow from Volume 8, Issue 30 (February 24, 1989), and by Les Earnest, John McCarthy, and Jerry Hollombe [3 separate contributions] from Volume 8, Issue 31 (February 27, 1989). James B. Rule et. al, "Preserving Individual Autonomy in an Information-Oriented Society". In Lance J. Hoffman et. al. Computer Privacy in the Next Decade, New York: Academic Press (1980), pp. 65-87. John Shattuck, "Computer Matching is a Serious Threat to Individual Rights", CACM, Vol. 27, No. 6 (June, 1984), pp. 538-541. VIII. Nov 14-16: SECURITY AND RELIABILITY -- Week #8 A. Assignment: Nov 14: Written assignment #3 due. B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 6 Introduction to SECURITY AND RELIABILITY -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Alan Borning, "Computer System Reliability and Nuclear War". CACM, Vol 30, No. 2 (February, 1987), pp. 112-131. Peter J. Denning, "Computer Viruses". American Scientist, Vol. 76 (May-June, 1988), pp. 236-238. Jonathan Jacky, "Safety-Critical Computing: Hazards, Practices, Standards and Regulation". Original manuscript prepared for Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. David Lorge Parnas, "Software Aspects of Strategic Defense Systems". Originally published in American Scientist, Vol. 73, No. 5, pp. 432-440. Reprinted in CACM, Vol. 28, No. 12 (December, 1985), pp. 1326-1335. Brian Cantwell Smith, "The Limits of Correctness". Issued as Report No. CSLI-85-35 by the Center for the Study of Language and Information (Stanford University), and marked Copyright 1985 by Brian Cantwell Smith. Also printed in the ACM SIG journal Computers and Society, combined Vol. 14, No. 4 and Vol. 15, Nos. 1, 2, 3 (Winter / Spring / Summer / Fall, 1985), pp. 18-26. RISKS-FORUM DIGEST excerpts Clifford Stoll, "Stalking the Wily Hacker". CACM, Vol. 31, No. 5 (May, 1988), pp. 484-497. "Computers and War: If Knowledge is Power, Where is Responsibility?" Jack Buesmanns and Karen Wieckert. CACM. IX. Nov 21-23: SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF DESIGN -- Week #9. A. Assignment: Nov 21: Written assignment #4 described. B. Film: "Computers in Context." (about the design and impacts of information systems on work, including expert systems) (distributed by California Newsreel, San Francisco, CA.) C. Readings: From Computerization and Controversy -- Bullen, Christine V. and John L. Bennett. "Groupware in Practices: An Interpretation of Work Experiences". Original manuscript prepared for Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. Ehn, Pelle. "The Art and Science of Designing Computer Artifacts." Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 1 (August, 1989), pp. 21-42. Mouritsen, Jan and Niels Bjorn-Anderson. "Understanding Third Wave Information Systems". Original manuscript prepared for Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. X. Dec 5-7: ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES -- Week #10. A. Assignment: Dec 5: Written assignment #4 due. B. Readings: Computerization and Controversy -- Section 7 Introduction to ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES -- Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices "ACM Code of Professional Conduct". Reprinted in Deborah G. Johnson and John W. Snapper (eds.), Ethical Issues in the Use of Computers. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company (1985), pp. 31-34. Carl Barus, "Military Influence on the Electrical Engineering Curriculum Since World War II". IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 2 (June, 1987), pp. 3-9. Rob Kling, "Computer Abuse and Computer Crime as Organizational Activities". Computer / Law Journal, Vol. II, No. 2 (Spring, 1980), pp. ??-??. Reprinted in Computers and Society, 12 (1982), pp. 12-24. Terry Winograd, "Some Thoughts on Military Funding". The CPSR Newsletter, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Spring, 1984), pp. 1-3. Joseph Weizenbaum, Computer Power and Human Reason, Chapter 10. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company (1976), pp. 258-280 + Notes to Chapter 10, pp. 286-287. COMPUTERIZATION IN SOCIETY Instructor: Rob Kling Mailing Address: Department of Information and Computer Science University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA 92717 Course Duration: One quarter (10 weeks) Audience: Upper division students, primarily majors in Information & Computer Science. This course is required for all Information & Computer Science majors. Goals: To understand the social issues raised by the use of computerized systems To understand the impacts of computer use on people and social groups To analyze situations in which computerization is important and to identify their salient issues. To encourage you to connect very specific technical activity to a broader human context To help you understand the basis for many of the social controversies about computerization To encourage you to think carefully about the social role computing and the responsibilities of computer professionals To encourage you to explore your own value positions relative to these issues To introduce you to a variety of thinkers and scholars who have carefully studied specific issues. Thus, it acquaints you with the way some of these issues look when studied carefully (rather than just bulled about casually.). Description: Introduction to computerization as a social process, examines the social opportunities and problems raised by new information technology, the ways individuals and group mobilize support for their preferences, and the consequences of different choices for different groups. Computerization and the quality of worklife, personal privacy, organizational productivity, unemployment, and the manageability, risks and accountability of large systems. Course Organization and Teaching Methods: This course is designed to help you think critically about the role of computerization in many spheres of social life -- from economic competition to warfare, from the quality of working life to changes in schooling. The readings serve as an introduction to controversies about what computer systems should play in social life, and the effects of computerized systems of different kinds. This course exposes you to more than one way of viewing what is important about computerization and what sense to make of it. This approach requires that you read a number of books and articles which represent different points of view about the same topic. You may be reading more pages each week (60-100) than in a typical computer science course. I hope that the reading is interesting and stimulating. I expect you to keep up with the readings for the each class. You are assigned to a discussion section which serves several roles. The discussion sections provide an important opportunity to discuss the readings and ideas developed in the lectures. The lectures introduce you to key ideas about a particular topic. I will discuss some of the readings in the lectures. I will examine some of their key ideas an the relationships between them. But there isn't enough time to discuss all of the readings in depth. Nor is there an opportunity in a lecture class of 45 students to examine all of the assumptions, lines of analysis, and how they relate to each other. The discussion sections provide an important opportunity for you to answer questions which puzzle you and to explore ideas of special interest to you. You will benefit most as an active participant in a discussion section. Additional Activities: The discussion sections provide time for raising questions about the lectures and readings, discussing the written assignments, taking and discussing the midterm, etc. There will be two quizzes in the fifth and ninth weeks and two written assignments in the third and seventh weeks. These quizzes and assignments will primarily cover the required readings and ideas discussed in the lectures. If some key topics are discussed in both discussion sections, they may appear on a quiz. You will also be asked to prepare one "organized" set of notes for one of the lectures. (You have 2 weeks after the particular lecture to hand in the notes.) The notes will be equivalent in grade value to one quiz or written assignment. Organizing these notes helps you think through the issues developed in one lecture in detail. There will be midterm and final exams which will emphasize both the readings an d lectures. There will be four written assignments. You will receive credit for participation in the discussion section and/or the bulletin board. Reflections: This course differs from many other computer science courses since: 1. Human values are central rather than peripheral to our inquiry. Some of the skills you will learn in this course include understanding the interplay between value and technical issues. 2. We emphasize controversy rather than consensus. In most computer science courses, an authority such as a textbook or instructor tells you what to believe. You exercise your ingenuity by applying received truths to new situations. In this course, you learn about topics where people differ in how they view the key issues; you exercise your ingenuity by understanding how the same issue can appear from different perspectives, and in identifying key issues in complex social situations. 3. We emphasize understandings as much as "findings." These understandings develop in a less sequential manner than in many science courses. Our modes of inquiry are much more concentric--the same issue is studied in several different settings and therein takes on new meanings. I have organized the major topics into a sequence that I believe has a clear and helpful progression. However, these topics are not easily organized or kept so. My role is raise and refine issues and to provide you with leads to other sources rather than to simply transmit authorized information. We are studying some controversial topics which take the form of poorly understood dilemmas. In contrast, in much of computer science, there are, at worst, simply "tradeoffs." The process of reasoning through some of the situations we study is more important than the conclusions we reach. (In this way it is like a design course or programming course where exercising the skills is more important than the particular system which is designed and built.) Some of the class time is devoted to discussing the ideas presented in lectures, in the readings, or of particular concern to you. These discussions provide an opportunity to share our ideas, and think aloud. Many of the discussions do not reach a simple set of commonly accepted conclusions. Rather, they conclude with a richer and possibly more complex and ambiguous view of the topics we started to discuss. This doesn't mean that they are "bull." But they do yield a different kind of understanding than that which is emphasized in most science courses. I sometimes take specific stands; but most often, I am presenting different ways of viewing a particular issue and underlining significant social aspects of computing developments. Required Text: Dunlop, C., & Kling, R. (Ed.). (February 1991). Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices.Academic Press. (Referred to below as CC). This book, just published, is designed as a text for computers & society courses ... and it's also written for a larger variety of professionals. Information about ordering or getting inspection copies (qualified instructors) is at the end of this post. /Rob Kling ---------- Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (Editors) Many students, professionals, managers, and laymen are hungry for honest, probing discussions of the opportunities and problems of computerization. This anthology introduces some of the major social controversies about the computerization of society through a collection of over 50 articles. It highlights some of the key value conflicts and social choices about comput-erization. It helps readers recognize the social processes that drive and shape computerization, and to understand the paradoxes and ironies of computerization Some of the controversies about computerization covered in this collection include: * the appropriateness of utopian and anti-utopian scenarios for understanding the future * whether computerization demonstrably improves the productivity of organizations * how computerization transforms work * how computerized systems can be designed with social principles in view * whether electronic mail facilitates the formation of new communities or undermines intimate interaction * whether computerization is likely to reduce privacy and personal freedom * the risks raised by computerized systems in health care * the ethical issues when computer science researchers accept military funding * the extent to which organizations, rather than "hackers," are significant perpetrators of computer abuse The authors include Paul Attewell, Carl Barus, Wendell Berry, James Beninger, John Bennett*, Alan Borning, Niels Bjorn- Anderson*, Chris Bullen*, Roger Clarke, Peter Denning, Pelle Ehn, Edward Feigenbaum, Linda Garcia, Suzanne Iacono, Jon Jacky*, Rob Kling, Kenneth Kraemer*, John Ladd, Kenneth Laudon, Pamela McCorduck, David Parnas, Judith Perrolle*, James Rule, John Sculley, John Shattuck, Brian Smith, Clifford Stoll, Lindsy Van Gelder, Fred Weingarten, Joseph Weizenbaum, and Terry Winograd. (*'d authors have contributed new essays for the book.) Each of the seven sections opens with an essay which identifies major controversies and places the articles in the context of key questions and debates. These essays also point the reader to a significant body of research and debate about the controversies. Published by Academic Press (Boston). 758 pp. Available now $34.95 pbk - USA//Canada ISBN: 0-12-224356-0 (pbk) To obtain Computerization & Controversy outside of North America, please contact your local Academic Press/Harcourt Brace Jovanovich office, including: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Ltd (Western Europe and UK) 24-28 Oval Rd. London NW1 7DX U.K. Telephone: 44-71-267-4466 Fax: 44-71-482-2293 Telex: 25775 ACPRESS G Cable: ACADINC LONDON NW1 Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Group Pty, Ltd (Australia/New Zealand) Locked bag 16 Marrickville, NSW 2204 Australia Telephone: (01) 517-8999 Fax: (02) 517-2249 Individuals in North America may purchase copies directly from Academic Press by calling 1-800-321-5068, faxing to 800-235-0256 or by writing to: Academic Press Ordering Academic Press Warehouse Order Dept. 465 S. Lincoln Troy, Missouri 63379 Computerization and Controversy is a 758 page paperback and sells for $34.95 in US$ in the US and Canada. Prices in other parts of the world may differ slightly. Faculty who offer related courses (Values and Technology; Applied Ethics; Computers & Society; Information Systems and Behavior, etc.) may order examination copies from Academic Press. Write on university letterhead, and include the following information about your course: class name and number, department, # of students, books used --in the past, adoption deadline. Send your requests for examination copies in the US or Canada to: Amy Yodannis College and Commercial Sales Supervisor Academic Press 1250 Sixth Avenue San Diego, CA 92101 tel: 619-699-6547 fax: 619-699-6715 If you wish a review copy outside of North America, please contact your local Harcourt Brace Jovanovich office. If you have trouble obtaining a review copy for a legitimate course of journal, please contact Rob Kling at UC-Irvine (kling@ics.uci.edu). Dear Folks, A colleague (Tom Jewett) and I are teaching an upper division course about social issues in computing to information and computer science majors. We are soliciting information about people experiences with using electronic boards as a supplement to class discussion. We are interested in ways to effectively structure bbs use. Course structure and resources: COMPUTERIZATION IN SOCIETY (ICS131) is required of all Information and Computer Science students at UC-Irvine. (The department has had a requirement of this kind since the early 1970s, and we have alot of collective experience in teaching the traditional elements of such courses). This course serves as an introduction to the social side of computerization, professional and ethical issues for ICS majors. It is also the first course in a 3 quarter sequence about information systems. The instructors (including Tom and me) have several goals. Primarily, we see this course as one which SENSITIZES students to key issues, helps them see key social issues of computing from several points of view, and helps stimulate their CONTINUING interest in these topics. It is not a course organized to teach 30 major facts, 5 major systems, and 10 major analytical techniques (grin)! [There are "factual" and analytical elements in the course, but these are not the main things which are trying to teach in this course.] [I have recently posted a syllabus for the course here.] Given this intellectual agenda, we see students' participation in discussions as a key way to help them understand the nature of key social issues about computerization, to develop an experiential understanding of their importance, and to work through key ideas. In practice, we rely more upon a variety of written assignments (see below). COMPUTERIZATION IN SOCIETY enrolls between 25-45 students per section. (ICS offers 4-5 sections each year to accommodate all of the majors). With a class of this size, instructors usually use the collective meeting times for lecture and some discussion. (The readings for the course now come from a new book, Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices by Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (eds.) (Academic Press, Boston, 1991).) To supplement the lectures, we divide the class into 2-3 discussion sections of about 10-15 students each. Virtually all of the students who take this course are ICS majors (it should have broader appeal, but this is another story). All ICS majors at UCI have personal email accounts, and it is easy to set up bbs for specialized purposes, such as specific classes. The students have generally good computer access, but the accessibility of computing depends upon the time of day, day of the week, and week of the quarter that students seek a terminal (There are also dialup services and terminals in dorms). In the past few years, some faculty have used a bbs for this class -- as a way to communicate administrative changes and sometimes as voluntary supplements to discussion sections. This year Tom and I are considering trying to integrate bbs use more fully into the class. One issue that we often face is relatively low levels of participation by students in class discussions .. both in the larger lectures and the smaller discussion sections. I have heard complaints of this kind of for 20 years from faculty in various disciplines, especially when classes have more than 10 students. Much depends upon the local student culture, among other things. At UC-Irvine, the undergraduate ICS students are not used to seminars. They are used to "science courses" which use authoritative texts written in the "voice of God" and instructors who function as information transmitters. An oddity this quarter is that the lecture rooms we are assigned have movable chairs, but the smaller discussion sections are currently assigned to a large hall with fixed seats! ====================================== All of this is context for some issues we are working out re. the use of bbs: ** One major issue is how much to REQUIRE the use of a bbs as a place to make comments, raise questions, comment on other students' comments or the readings etc. (It is of course also possible to allow students substantial discretion ... ). ** Another issue is how much the instructors should stay out of the way in these bbs discussions versus sometimes taking active roles to get things back on track. ** What other issues might we anticipate now? I would appreciate any comments from those of you who had any experiences in teaching or tracking courses which used bbs in an integral way. ---- Rob Kling Introduction Computerization in Society University of California, Irvine ICS131, Fall 1991 (Version G:September 24, 1991) Instructors: Prof. Rob Kling -- Room: 458D ICS; Phone: 856-5955; email:kling@ics.uci.edu Mr. Tom Jewett -- email: jewett@ics Teaching Assistants: Jerry Davis jmdavis@ics Jeanne Pickering pickerin@ics Lecture Times: Mr. Jewett -- T-Th 2-3:30, Room: CS209 Prof. Kling -- T-Th 3:30-4:50 PM, Room:ICF 102 Discussion sections: TBA A. Required Materials Text: Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (Eds). Academic Press, Boston. 1991. We will also ask you to read other kinds of materials during the quarter -- including timely newspaper or magazine articles and specific Internet bulletin boards in which people report, discuss, and debate specific social aspects of computerization. B. What is This Course About? The computerization of society is taking place at dizzying speed. Already the words "computer" and "revolution" have been coupled like "bread" and "butter". Almost every week we're bombarded with information about new computer technologies, and predictions about their influence on emerging social changes. But the real social choices and consequences of computerization are not openly discussed in many places. Professionals, technologists, policy-makers, as well as the public, often have difficulty getting access to materials that help them understand key issues in the major controversies, and which represent different points of view. A steady stream of news and professional articles mixes together many issues and perspectives in an enticing but confusing flow. In the same week, one can read stories of stunning technological advances, possibilities of computerization's transforming the way people work, and how single people are finding mates on computer bulletin boards. Mixed into this flow of generally buoyant articles are short notes of seemingly idiosyncratic problems, such as a homeowner's receiving a $500,000 water bill, a software bug's removing phone service from 2,000,000 people for a day, a person suing a bank because of errorin their debit card account, or the ACLU claiming that a new Federal computer system threatens personal privacy. These diverse kinds of news stories usually don't explicitly identify the nature of the debates of which they are a part -- such as controversies about the kind of protection the public needs and gets from providers of computer-based services. But many other experiences of computerization are essentially private, so countless other daily triumphs, pleasures, hassles, tragedies, and failed expectations are simply not reported. And it's hard for many professionals to find articles that synthesize this complex mix of themes into a more useful and coherent portrait. While computer scientists often learn a great deal about specific technologies and systems, they also work in locations which are socially quite distant from many end users and their triumphs and troubles with computerized systems. This course goes behind the headlines and front-page stories about hackers, viruses, multimedia computers, and new chips. It provides an in-depth look at computers as they relate to productivity in business firms, workplaces, communities, public policy, communication, social control, safety, privacy, and moral values. It also explains how controversies about computerization often rest on hidden conflicts between competing interests. Many of the key social choices surrounding the use of computer technology are not yet fixed. Computers will transform our society as dramatically as the automobile. But with computerized systems, we don't yet have the equivalents of unbreathable air, congested freeways, and foreign oil dependency. We may be able to avoid many such problems if we recognize that computerization is fundamentally a social process. Computerization involves much more than putting powerful computers on every desktop, school desk, and throughout homes and factories. Social progress doesn't automatically come from developing, distributing or purchasing the right shrink-wrapped box. This course highlights numerous questions that computerization raises as computer use expands into virtually every corner of everyday life. When does computerization really improve the productivity of organizations? What risks do computerized medical devices involve? Is computerization reducing personal privacy because organizations can now easily share or sell records about their clients? What possibilities does telecommuting really offer people for working at home, while at the same time reducing gas consumption and air pollution? Do electronic mail and computerized conferences promote the formation of new "communities", or do theyundermine intimate interaction? Does computerized surveillance of workers establish a new and troublesome precedent, or is it a fundamentally legitimate activity with strong historical roots? This course is designed to help you understand the range of impacts that computing has now and can have when it is used by business, public agencies and individuals. Since computerization raises many social issues (e.g. quality of work, unemployment, balance of social power, privacy), this course is organized as a survey. Through selected readings, discussion, lectures, and written assignments, you will become acquainted with the major issues and social dimensions of different computer technologies. (The topics of the lectures and readings are listed in the associated syllabus. Please read it carefully.) Computing is rapidly changing its "texture" as small machines and large scale networks become commonplace. Thus, another major goal of this course is to acquaint you with ways of thinking clearly about the social roles of computing as you live and work with it in the next decades. C. Why is This Course Required for ICS Students? This course is required for ICS majors. The ICS faculty believes that as technologists, we have a special need to be well informed about the social aspects of the technologies we create, develop, promote and maintain. High technologies are attractive to a large public because of their possible social effects. They are also troublesome because of their social effects. Competent Computer Scientists must understand both the opportunities and problems engendered by different forms of computerization. As computer professionals you will be faced with controversies throughout your careers. Controversies are not some distant events which take place in Washington DC while Computer Scientists quietly do "real work" in a basement laboratory in Illinois or an ocean view office in California! There are several aspects of this course which have already been controversial: First, the very existence of a course like this is controversial in some computer science departments (but not at UCI). However, there have been other controversies about our enabling you to use an electronic bulletin board for class discussion (see below) and giving undergraduate university students access to all of the Internet bulletin boards. [Some people are offended by the kinds of discussions about sex, politics or hacking tricks which take place on a few of the several hundred such bulletin boards. In a pluralist society, it is predictable that some people's interests will transgress the norms of "decent behavior" held by other people. Since the Internet boards and computer boards in universities are often supported (in part) with public funds, their content is sometimes subject to unusual debate and demands for policing. (See Computerization and Controversy, pp.325-326, 376-378 for more information about these issues.) There are further controversies about the extent to which we should require you to use a computerized bboard to supplement face-to-face discussions and whether the instructors should participate actively in the resulting electronic discussions. Even though you may not yet have voiced a position in these controversies, you participate in them by whatever actions you take or avoid which are relevant to them. This particular example focuses on what are today "leading edge" uses of computing in instruction. If you favor any of them, and act to support them, you are a bit of a "computer revolutionary," not just a bystander. As computer professionals you can expect to affect and be affected by the controversies studied in this course. You will be expected as an employee, co-worker, consultant, teacher, professional, teacher, citizen, neighbor and friend to have developed a thorough, well-reasoned understanding of any computing issue and to be able to act on this understanding responsibly. This course will help you develop some of the skills you will need to be a responsible and effective professional. D. Goals for the Course The course emphasizes skills in: ** Understanding the impacts of computer use on people and social groups; ** Understanding the social issues raised by the use of computing; ** Understanding the how the social controversies about the development, use, and regulation of computing technologies are represented in different kinds of publications, including newspapers, magazines, professional journals, books. ** Analyzing situations of computer use to identify their salient issues. ** Writing your ideas in a coherent, well structured, expository term paper. Theories of how technologies "operate" in social settings, social values, and selected facts are all relevant here. These will be studied through reading and discussion. Toward these ends, the course includes several different kinds of intellectual challenge: ** It encourages you to connect very specific technical activity to a broader human context; ** It encourages you to explore your own value positions relative to these issues; ** It encourages you to think carefully about computing and its social role. ** It introduces you to a variety of thinkers and scholars who have carefully studied specific issues. Thus, it acquaints you with the way some of these issues look when studied carefully (rather than just bulled about casually.). A course like ICS131 helps you increase your insight into the context and rationale of computerization. Such insight can help you deal more successfully with the variety of managers and users that you will face in industry. It may also help you become more articulate in explaining that which you do to others. E. Course Format We have organized the course with a series of two lecture/discussions each week and also one dedicated face-to-face discussion section each week. We expect you to participate in the discussion portion of the class meetings and on a computerized bboard which we have set up. This course differs from many other ICS courses since: * Human values are central rather than peripheral to our inquiry. Some of the skills you will learn in this course include understanding the interplay between value and technical issues; * We emphasize understandings as much as "findings"; and * These understandings develop in a less sequential manner than in many science courses. Our modes of inquiry are much more concentric--the same issue is studied in several different settings and therein takes on new meanings. We have organized the major topics into a sequence that we believe has a clear and helpful progression. However, these topics are not easily organized or kept so. ** My role is an issue raiser/refiner and resource person as well as an "information transmitter." ** We are studying some controversial topics which take the form of poorly understood dilemmas. In contrast, in much of computer science, there are, at worst, simply "tradeoffs." ** The process of reasoning through some of the situations we study is more important than the conclusions we reach. (In this way it is like a design course or programming course where exercising the skills is more important than the particular system which is designed and built.) ** Some of the class time is devoted to discussing the ideas presented in lectures, in the readings, or of particular concern to you. These discussions provide an opportunity to share our ideas, and think aloud.... a very valuable and rapidly disappearing opportunity in undergraduate classes at U.C.I. ** Many of the discussions do not reach a simple set of commonly accepted conclusions. Rather, they conclude with a richer and possibly more complex and ambiguous view of the topics we started to discuss. These complexities don't mean that these topics are "bull." But they do yield a different kind of understanding than that which is emphasized in most science courses. We will sometimes take specific stands; but most often, we are presenting different ways of viewing a particular issue and underlining significant social aspects of computing developments. We want you to understand some of the key positions about these issues and tdevelop your own point of view. F. Course Work and Grading We believe that you develop your understandings of the social aspects of computerization by: ** Carefully examining your personal experiences; ** Reading or listening to analyses developed by other people who hold different points of view; ** Developing your own analyses by expressing your ideas to others through writing and discussion. This course is organized with a combination of lectures, readings, films, discussions, a course notebook, and a term paper. Usually, there will be two lectures and one discussion session each week. We are also organizing a bulletin board specially for ICS131 as a forum for discussion of key ideas, readings, news, etc. The attached reading list outlines the major topics and readings we will include this quarter. In addition to the readings, lectures, and discussions, there may be outside speakers, special (ungraded) exercises in class, and films. Further, we expect you to track the discussions on certain Internet bulletin boards where people discuss social aspects of computerization. These include comp.risks, alt.privacy, comp.society, comp.society.development, and alt.comp.acad-freedom.news. In addition to the readings, we are requiring the following. ** We are asking you to collect a variety of materials into a Course Notebook -- including your comments on the assigned readings, bulletin board articles, summaries of news reports and articles that pertain to the course (and your reflections on them). (See below for more details); (50% of your final grade) ** There will be a 15-20 page term paper in which you examine a key social controversy about computerization by using the readings, lectures, discussions, debates on the Internet bboards news stories and other sources; (30% of your final grade) ** You will receive credit for participation in the discussion section and the classes's special computerized bulletin board. (20% of your final grade) Grading in this course emphasizes the skills noted in this introduction. It does not depend upon whether your values and evaluation of the social opportunities and problems of different technologies agrees with mine or the TAs. We are interested in the clarity of reasoning you use to reach your conclusions, your use of evidence, your understanding of the sources you read, etc. This does not mean that "all conclusions are merely opinion" or that "all opinions are equally valid." It does mean that we are studying topics over which people do disagree about what is humanly desirable and what is less so. To get a good grade, you should not trto take positions you don't believe in simply to "agree" with me. We hope that you will use this course as an opportunity to learn about the social dimensions of computer technologies and how different developments align with your own values. The attached syllabus lists the sequence of topics and assigned readings. This course is designed to help you think critically about the role of computerization in many spheres of social life -- from economic competition to warfare, from the quality of working life to changes in schooling. The articles from Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices introduce you you to more than one way of viewing what is important and what sense to make of it. This approach requires that you read the books and articles. You may be reading more pages each week (60-100) than in a typical computer science course. The materials vary in their form and complexity. Some of the bulletin board posts which you see on the Internet or on ics.131 will be short and direct. Newspaper stories may be brief, "factual," but not attempt to analyze the events which for the story. (We want you to add your analyses and reactions to such stories in your Course Notebooks). Some of the required readings will advocate a specific position. Others are more scholarly attempts to characterize an issue and weigh evidence. We believe that much of this reading is more interesting and stimulating than the majority of textbooks which you have read as a student. But we also realize that you may need some help in understanding some of the more complex or sophisticated readings. We will provide help, where you may need it, through exercises, the lectures, and the discussion sections. We also encourage you to post questions about concepts which puzzle you on the ics.131 class bboard. (You will get some credit towards participation if you ask questions or post comments which help other students.) We expect you to keep up with the readings schedule which whave listed in the syllabus. 1. The Course Notebook -- Some Details A major purpose of this course is to sensitize you to a wide range of social issues and consequences of computerization. The assigned readings provide one route. But many issues about computerization arise everyday and appear in conversations with friends and in the mass media -- in newspapers, magazine articles, radio commentaries, and TV documentaries. We are requiring you to keep track of your notes about the assigned readings, class discussions, and other materials in a loose leaf notebook which you divide into specific sections with tabs. We will work with you during the first few weeks of the quarter to specify and refine an effective format and workable collection of materials. We would like your Course Notebook to include materials such as these: a. Your analysis and reactions to the assigned readings from Computerization and Controversy (see below). Expository notes on the assigned readings don't have to cover every page and paragraph. But they should be complete enough that someone not familiar with the assigned article would gain from your notes a good idea of the article's essential message; b. Your observations about the substance and process of the discussions -- face to face and on the course's special computer bulletin board. c. Key stories and controversies about the social aspects of computerization that appear in the news media and the ics.131 class and Internet bulletin boards. You may wish to download and/or print certain bboard messages to include in your Course Notebook along with your "critical" comments (see below). (Note: Please indicate your sources for this material: name / date / page numbers of newspaper or magazine; date and time of radio / TV show, etc.) This course is aimed toward social issues in computing. We're happy to see in your notebooks some articles on new technology, but please comment on the social implications of that technology -- whether or not the article's author does so. E.g., does the article represent "technological utopianism"? How does the new product fit with Wendell Berry's criteria for adopting a new technology? Do you see important risks with this technology that the story does nomention? Etc. d. Your work on some special short assignments which we would like you to add to your Course Notebook during the quarter. "Critical" doesn't imply that you must disagree. Critical means that you should examine the material analytically .. for its strengths and weaknesses and relate it to something else, such as your own experience, other articles or news stories, class discussion, etc. Please don't just hand in summaries of the readings, and don't just hand in news clippings without your own reflections. In the case of news clippings, etc., the "critical reflections" should indicate why you selected that piece, what responses you had to it, and how it supports or contradicts other materials you've read (or opens up new themes). For each of the assigned readings, we would like you to develop a page of notes which addresses questions like these: i) What are the main themes of the work? ii)Who is the author(s) and his/her relationship to the topic and audience? What stakes do the authors have in their approach? iii)What assumptions do the authors make (key starting points)? iv)What sort of questions do the authors ask (e.g., questions about possibilities or actualities; questions framed in economic, social, or technological terms?) v) In asking questions, what sort of concepts do the authors use and emphasize? e.g; 1) Images of organizations, clients, organizational set, markets, organizational change? 2) Nature of technology, role of technology in social life, nature of technological changes? 3) Nature of workers, managers, clients & their actions & relationships vi)What sorts of methods do the authors use to find out about the world? (How interesting & how valid are they?) vii)What sorts of answers, solutions or explanations do the authors give to the questions they ask? viii)How does this article relate to other articles which you've read or debates which you've heard/seen? We will provide additional guidance about your Course Notebooks in class. We may asked you to turn in the most recent week's portion at any time, with one day's notice. We plan to review your Course Notebook several times during the quarter. While we will evaluate your complete notebook at the end of the quarter, this evaluation will include our observations about its "richness" during the quarter. 2. Discussions -- Face to Face and Electronic We believe that analytical and exploratory discussions are central to help you learn about complex ideas where there are several different relevant perspectives. Many students enjoy discussions, but we realize that some students are more timid in larger groups. Consequently, we are providing two different discussion venues, in addition to the discussions which take place with the lectures -- weekly small groudiscussions with a Teaching Assistant and discussions on a computer bulletin board which is devoted to this class (ics.131). We expect you to contribute helpfully to both of these by sharing your ideas, voicing your questions, building on other students' observations, and introducing relevant timely articles/events (such as those which you experience, which are reported in the news or discussed on Internet bboards). Our assessment of your participation depends more upon the quality than the quantity of your contributions. But you must participate at some minimum level in each of these forums, and in a significant way in at least one of them. We will discuss this further in class. We want you to regularly read certain Internet bboards, such as comp.risks, alt.privacy, comp.society, comp.society.development, and alt.comp.acad-freedom.news because they contain discussions whose substance pertains to this course. However, the processes of debate which you see on these boards should also be interesting and sometimes serve as models for your own bboard use. (Also see Computerization and Controversy, pp. 376-378, 647-652 for debates and discussions whichare reprinted from comp.risks). a. PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSIONS (or "I don't have anything to say!"): There are lots of ways that you can contribute to the class discussion in the face to face meetings or on the ics.131 bboard. They do not all require having some fabulous insight or world-shattering theory. Here are some (but not all possible) suggestions of what might be a useful contribution: MAKING COMMENTS offering information offering an opinion (someone else's or your own) giving examples (or counter-examples) -- based in your readings general knowledge, or personal experience informing others about a source of information (such as a pertinent book, magazine or newspaper article). providing evidence (for or against) pursuing and analyzing an argument, example, suggestion CLEARING THINGS UP revealing confusion clarifying indicating alternatives testing for agreement identifying areas of disagreement suggesting an integrative agreement or compromise SOCIAL & EMOTIONAL WORK relieving group tension encouraging expressing feelings agreeing with another participant's comment, question, feeling DIRECTING TRAFFIC bringing up a new topic setting standards pointing out prejudiced, narrow-minded, or simplistic arguments gatekeeping (helping someone else in or out of the discussion) summarizing ASKING FOR THINGS asking for clarification raising new questions paraphrasing another's statement to test for understanding seeking information from other participants seeking opinion from other participants A high quality participation will include a variety of these types of contributions. b. ELECTRONIC ETIQUETTE AND USING THE CLASS BULLETIN BOARD GENERAL ETIQUETTE: If you have a long post (more than 22 lines in an 80 column window), please include a sentence or 2 abstract so that people can decide if they want to read it. Edit your messages before you post them to the Bboard for factual correctness, logic, and grammar. Do not criticize individuals - criticize their logic, data, etc. SUBJECT LINES: Each message has a subject line, and these can help you, other students, and the instructors track the thread of a given discussion. Sometimes you will want to change the direction of a discussion. If you change the subject, please create a new subject line for your message which is is a good short description of your new topic or approach. For example, if there is a discussion about whether computer terminals emit harmful radiation, the subject of that thread might be "VDT's and Health Problems." If you want to shift the topic to the way that the manufacture of computer chips leads to toxic wastes, you should change the SUBJECT line to something like, "Health Hazards of Chip Manufacture." GRADING THE POSTS: We will be reading the posts every day or two. This means you should also be reading the ICS131 bboard several times a week. We expect you to a make at least one post each week. To make an informed post, you should have read the assignments for the section to which you are referring. We will periodically grade the posts for: 1) knowledge (i.e. have you read the assigned materials?) 2) relevance (is your contribution helpful to the discussion?) 3) logic (do you make good points and defend them ably?) 4) etiquette (are you polite?) and 5) insight (do you look at the problem in a novel, helpful way?). Please do not feel that each and every post you make must score highly in all of these areas (except for etiquette). Your class discussion grade will depend upon the entire corpus of your posts as well as your participation in the smaller discussion section. c. Note: Our design of the role of the electronic bulletin boards in ICS131 an example of a socio-technical design. In addition to selecting a technological support system, we have made many social choices, such as integrating bboard use into other class activities, requiring a minimum level of active bboard use, characterizing the kind of comments we would like to see, rewarding "good use," deciding not to create anonymous accounts, and so on. Social choices like these can influence effectiveness of the course bboard as much as technical choices, such as giving you editors which are better than vi or emacs (!) or multi-media conferencing capabilities. We will discuss socio-technical design later this quarter. 3. Term Papers -- Examine social controversies about computerization in a 15-20 page paper. (You may work in teams of 2 on this project, if you produce a more thorough paper.) a. Your paper should identify a specific social controversy about computerization and cover these topics: i) What are the major positions and arguments for and again them? ii)Which social interests are well represented (and not well represented) in the debate and action about it? iii)Where is the debate conducted? -media types such as popular, academic, special interest - government institutions such as legislature, civil or criminal courts -workplace by collective bargaining, management or corporate policy -marketplace -academia (academic publications, seminars) iv)What are the stakes for different interests? v) What is the quality of research/analyses that you see in the debates? vi)What is the character of analyses and studies supporting some of the major positions? vii)Describe the conception of computer technology and organizations which develop/use/regulate technologies reflected in different positions. viii)What are your own conclusions about the debate?. b. You should pick a controversy which interests you and which is timely. During the quarter, you will learn about numerous social controversies of computerization through the readings in Computerization and Controversy, inevitable news stories which will appear during the quarter, and discussions on the Internet bboards. Some sample controversies include: i) CAI: Is instructional computing at K-8th grade a source of educational improvement or waste of scarce $$? ii)Computer Literacy: What is computer literacy, who needs it, is it primarily hype in practice? iii)Consumer control: What kinds of control should (and do) people have over the use of their names in being resold to other firms for direct mail marketing? iv)Military Research: How does the scale, focus, and style of military research funding influence computer science as an academic discipline, if at all? v) Privacy protection: when is it necessary, and do we have enough? vi)The Computer-Productivity Paradox: Businesses spend about 50% of their capital budgets on computers and telecommunications equipment, but white collar productivity is growing at about the same slow rate that it did in 1980. Why are "computers showinup everywhere, except in the productivity statistics?" vii)Professional Accountability: Should computer professionals be licensed? viii)Reliable systems: Are computer systems to unreliable to use in situations where people's lives are at risk? (A recent Forester/Morrison article & the resulting debate on comp.risks are part of this literature) ix)Reliable systems: What is automatic program verification good for; will it work in practice for substantial systems? x) Software: What the important social elements of software engineering, and to what extent are they supported by the current generation of software research? xi)Virtual reality: Is it being hyped? What is it good for? What are the social issues? xii)Worklife & effectiveness: What is Groupware good for? Is it the next step in developing computer support for professional teams or is it simply a new set of technological toys for "rich white boys"? xiii)Worklife: Does computerization improve or degrade the character of working life in any deep ways? We will ask you to identify the controversy you want to examine more deeply in your term paper (and major sources of information) around the 5th week of class. c. Around the middle of the quarter we will ask you to identify the controversy you'd like to write about, and to start collecting then necessary materials for your term paper. We will also give you more information about topics and sources. However, you can start by examining issues in C omputerization and Controversy and examine the bibliographies at the end of the articles and the major sections for further information. We are interested in your ability to effectively integrate and interpret diverse sources of information which reflect different perspectives and contexts of computer use -- books, professional reports, analytical articles, recent new stories, bboard debates, etc. Where possible, we would like you to draw upon good examples from diverse kinds of sources rather than using primarily one kind of source. G. Why You Should Take this Course Now (in the Fall)? The attached reading list outlines the major topics and readings we will include this quarter. In addition to the readings, lectures, and discussions, there may be outside speakers, special (ungraded) exercises in class, and films. Further, we expect you to track the discussions on certain Internet bulletin boards where people discuss social aspects of computerization. These include comp.risks, alt.privacy, comp.society, comp.society.development, and alt.comp.acad-freedom.news. Many students don't see the value of ICS131 and put off taking it until the Winter or Spring quarters of their senior years. But once in ICS131, most students find it unusually stimulating and valuable. They see that they can learn systematically about the ways that people and organizations do or don't computerize. The course helps provide perspective on such practical matters different ways of organizing ICS instructional labs (regimented labs versus open access terminal rooms), the advantages and dilemmas of personal computing, the risks of using inadequately tested software in high-risk systems such as air-traffic control, automated teller machine nets, etc. They then wish that they had taken it earlier in their programs. Some students wish that they had taken ICS131 in their junior years so they could have begun building on their new insights earlier in their lives. ICS has a 3 quarter sequence of courses about the social analysis of computing which you might find specially exciting (ICS131-132-135). ICS131 examines the social issues raised by widespread computerization and computer use in a social perspective. The follow-on courses teach you a variety of skills so that you can investigate the social aspects of computer development and use in specific settings -- businesses, schools, hospitals, libraries, government agencies, etc. Some students also wish that they had taken it early enough to take follow-on courses like ICS132 and ICS135. Acknowledgements: This introduction was prepared by Rob Kling in discussion with Tom Jewett, Jeanne Pickering, Charles Dunlop (University of Michigan), Charles Huff (St. Olaf's College), Gregor Koso (Purdue), Mitzi Lewison (Galaxy Classroom), Clark Quinn (University of New South Wales), David Stodolsky (Rothskilde University), and Hank Van Cleef (Iowa State). Special thanks to Professor Dunlop for suggestions about the Course Notebook and to Professor Huff for concrete suggestions to enhance the quality of class discussions. Dear colleagues, I have been revising a course for undergraduate computer science majors which uses a book of readings about (social) controversies of computing. Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices by Charles Dunlop and Rob Kling (eds.) (Academic Press, Boston, 1991). I have taught such courses for about 20 years and usually used collections of articles as my course materials. While refining the course this month I have become acutely aware that most CS students take the majority of their courses from textbooks. I have taught from textbooks for other kinds of courses (e.g, data structures, AI, IS). But I have a growing suspicion that our reliance on textbooks for perhaps 90% of the undergrad CS courses least at UC-Irvine), has a cumulative effect of discouraging students to think critically and independently. I realize that textbooks are not all alike. In the case of data structures, for example, the books by Don Knuth and Tim Standish communicate significant excitement and a sense that there is a real research community actively exploring the properties of data structures and associated algorithms. However, most data structures texts that I've seen (for example), tend to ignore the history of the field and the ferment in the field. Some of these books are much more accessible to undergrads than are Standish or Knuth's books; but I don't believe that they stimulate curiosity as well. I am not attempting to criticize data structures books in particular. there is simply a deathly tone to many textbooks in all fields when they have their authoritative "voice of God" tone. And they tend to emphasize the consensus of what is known. I am raising the question whether textbooks dominating a curriculum has serious intellectual deficits for students ... and also reinforces whatever weaknesses they have in critical thinking skills. In certain humanities and social science disciplines, undergrads study diverse and competing materials as undergrads. One does not have to become a grad student to read Plato or Shakespeare "directly" (actually in translation). But there is a certain advantage to not locking undergrads into a mode of inquiry in which they read only about Plato or Kant (etc) n philosophy or about complex works in literary studies. The "original text" issue is simply an example of the way that undergrads in these fields are sometimes taught to comprehend complex materials. I can see good reasons for not teaching a first course in say, compiler theory, primarily through 1960s and 1970s JACM and CACM articles (grin). I suspect that the textbook dominated curriculum is structurally stacked against stimulating critical thinking by undergrads. I'm attaching anew section (of my yet again revised course introduction) which deals with this issue. It goes beyond Computers and Society courses in its significance . I'd appreciate any comments, as well as leads to materials that any of you have found useful in teaching/studying any topics within CS in a critical way. Thanks for your attention Rob Kling Department of Information & Computer Science UC-Irvine kling@ics.uci.edu 714-786-0873 ============================================== Excerpt from Introduction Computerization in Society University of California, Irvine ICS131, Fall 1991 (Version H: September 29, 1991) I. Literacy is the ability to make full sense and productive use of the opportunities of written language in the culture in which one lives. For scientists and professionals, literacy includes the abilities to understand the nature and value of new approaches, and to evaluate key controversies. There are numerous technological controversies in computer science, such as those about the choices of appropriate system designs, implementation strategies, programming languages, operating systems are hardware platforms. And there are key social controversies about the nature of effective and safe computing practices (including education, regulation, licensing). Most of these controversies are not resolved definitively in some distant city and then promulgated instantly throughout the land. They are the subject of ongoing debates in a variety of scholarly and professional publications and also within the kinds of organizations you are likely to work for. And they may be temporarily resolved in a specific place by the kinds of choices which you help make on very specific projects. A key goal of reading is being able to evaluate information and conflicting or incomplete claims analytically. (We can also evaluate writings emotionally: "this article made me feel good," or "I found that article confusing"). Writings speak for the authors, and like other humans, authors can be prejudiced, ignorant of important facts or concepts or mendacious -- or wise, honest, knowledgeable, and reliable. As a critical reader, you can carefully test readings for their logic, and seek to identify strengths and weaknesses. (Critical readers also learn more and enjoy their reading more than passive readers.) A text is any piece of writing that conveys a coherent meaning. Authors of novels, histories, essays, technical manuals, newspaper stories and textbooks often attempt to convey coherent meanings. To be concise, they assume that their readers have a certain knowledge of the world and knowledge of certain language systems. Information and Computer Science students mostly study from textbooks written specially for college students. Textbooks are an unusual kind of document, since they are often extremely well organized when compared with other kinds of texts. They also tend to avoid controversy and distill the consensus about a topic into a coherent exposition, complete with definitions of key terms, numerous examples organized in increasing complexity, and specific exercises. Textbooks have special value because they can make complex ideas accessible. But they have significant limitations, because their authoritative format does not normally stimulate much critical thinking. A curriculum which is based primarily on textbooks can stifle students' interest and ability to think critically. In Computer Science we usually teach from textbooks in all but a few advanced undergraduate courses, graduate courses, and courses on very new topics for which there are no textbooks. This course is not a graduate course that emphasizes the research approaches, theories, and research frontiers. We have found that undergraduates are very capable of working with complex bodies of diverse texts once they realize that many of the conventions about the authority of a single-voiced textbook and passive reading are not appropriate here. Because this approach relates more directly to the "real world" of your future professional practice, many students also find it refreshing and exciting. But it does require disciplined work. In this course we are requiring you to read and understand diverse and conflicting texts, rather than an authoritative textbook written in one voice. This collection of materials better represents how the world of discourse about lively topics is organized outside of the classroom. But this approach requires some different skills than you have used in most of your other courses. One key difference is that you have to orient yourself to the framework of diverse writers who are not writing specially for you. A writer for The Rolling Stone can expect her readers to understand heavy metal and Vanilla Ice. A writer for Byte Magazine or Communication of the ACM can assume that her reader to be familiar with Unix and silicon chips. If someone is described as being "hard on a keyboard" it would mean something different to readers of these magazines. During this quarter we are giving you articles and book excerpts from diverse sources. Computerization and Controversy contains articles from major newspapers like the New York Times -- Business Section, Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post. It contains articles from general scientific magazines (Scientific American, American Scientist), popular, professional and scholarly computer science journals (Computers and Society, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems Communications of the ACM, PC Computing, Computing Surveys), law journals (Computer/Law Journal), business magazines (Harvard Business Review) and social science journals (American Psychologist, Telecommunications Policy). These different publications aim at different audiences, encourage their authors to write with different concepts, and take some work to get oriented to. These are the kinds of publications which publish important articles about the social aspects of computerization, and we would like you to learn how to read them critically. Critical thinking is a disposition, a way of approaching issues that you face and materials that you read. It is a disposition of "reflective skepticism" -- the judicious suspension of assent, readiness to consider alternative explanations, not taking key ideas for granted when it might be reasonable to doubt them. It is frequently a challenge to conventional ways of thinking and to passively accepting every text you read as comparably authoritative. End=================================End=================================End %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % Managing Editor: Pen-Nan Lee % % fase@cs.uh.edu % % % % % % % % % % % % % % Organizing Committee % % % % Keith Pierce % % University of Minnesota, Duluth % % Currently on leave at the Software Engineering Institute % % Carnegie Mellon University % % Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 % % Telephone: (412)268-8145 % % Fax: (412)268-5758 % % Email: krp@sei.cmu.edu % % % % % % Laurie Werth % % Dept. of Computer Science % % Taylor Hall 2.124 % % University of Texas at Austin % % Austin, Texas 78712 % % Telephone: (512) 471-9535 % % Fax: (512)471-8885 % % Email: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu % % % % % % Pen-Nan Lee % % Dept. of Computer Science % % University of Houston % % Houston, TX 77204-3475 % % Telephone: (713)749-3144, 749-4791 % % Fax: (713)749-2378 % % Email: pnlee@cs.uh.edu % % Email: fase@cs.uh.edu % % % % % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%