hackers and the moral universe
So I had yet another fruitful conversation with Mike about the ongoing revolution, and we were discussing the $100 laptop.
Mike argued that giving kids computers and turning them into hackers will transform the way they look at the world.
I said, technology doesn’t always do great things, especially if the structures around it aren’t solid. There are many tech projects throughout the world that have failed miserably. One concern I have/had is replacing traditional culture with something else in some kind of a vacuum.
Now the interesting part was our long, circular argument about Hackers and the moral universe. For many years, I’ve considered myself a philosophical pragmatist (listen to this for more on pragmatism). I find the central argument compelling: we cannot know objective truth, and so it’s best not to concern ourselves with it too much, but to focus rather on outcomes: if X produces Y consistently, then it’s fair to say X produces Y is true. In the moreal world, this means there’s no appeal to ideal TRUTH or GOOD or GOD, but instead you say: I believe these things are good (people not starving, no one getting melted by white phosphorus, etc), and I will say actions are GOOD if they tend to lead to those results. It’s more complicated, but that’s the basics.
So my theory is that cultural morals develop over time because they work well; and then because they are taught to children who learn things like: share, do unto others…, never judge a man till you’ve walked in his shoes … etc. Kids learn these fundemental principles, and they learn them best if they have family and friends and structures around them that reenforce them AND they find that they get good outcomes from sharing, from being nice to each other etc.
So in “failed states” where violence is rampant, part of the problem is that NOT being violent maybe doesn’t bring you much. Morality about, say, not stealing, not killing etc. is only tenable in a culture where there are enough resources to make it worthwhile to not steal or kill. We are very happy to hang up our moral worries about killing, for instance, during wars (assuming we belive the wars a morally justified). Put another way, we can sit from the comfort of Montreal and say: it’s not moral for Afghan farmers to grow opium, but they will say, and rightly, This is what gets my family fed, if you have a “moral” problem with it, give me another means to feed my family, and then we’ll talk.
Getting back to hackers. My worry then, is dropping a bunch of computers into a world where there is not necessarily any benefit from being a computer whiz. Here, having knowledge of computers is clearly an advantage; what advantage might it bring in, say, a farming town, where the kids are supposed to be out in the fields? Where there is no computer-related work to be had anywhere? Where the kids could grow up in a world of computers but not have the moral and societal ability to function in their own world, once the computer is shut off. This isn’t a show-stopper, necessarily, but it’s a concern: we westerners have a tendency to see things so simply, and I’d argue that without addressing some structural problems, the outcomes might not be that good.
But Mike argues that turning a generation of kids into hackers will be good: they will look at the world as problems to be solved, they will share things, fix things, change things. Because, when you grow up with a computer in your hands, that’s what you do.
I was thinking about hacking and how it works. Why did Richard Stallman outline fundemental freedoms he did, as he did? At first I argued that it was informed by a certain cultural history, ie everything we learn in kindergarten (sharing is good, etc). And my concern is that, say, a poverty ravaged village in central Africa might not have the smae sorts of cultural and societal structures, and that a generation of $100 laptop hackers — in the middle of massive poverty and unrest — might end up being devastating, rather than good.
But as I think about it, it occurs to me that hacker culture developed the way it has — all over the world — not because of the societal and cultural morals that sit behind it, but rather because certain behaviour gives better outcomes: sharing code makes sense, helping others makes sense, free stuff makes sense, in an online world where you are trying to build things yourself. Basically, you help others with their coding problems, because they will help you. And you give your “services” away to projects, not just out of some sense of moral responsibility, but because a system that encourages sharing like this is a system that makes better software, and is more likely to give you the bits of code you need (for free) in order to do the things you need to do.
So, in a way, what I would call the “Good” of hacker culture is built right into the system, because it works better. And that will be as true in Montreal, as it is in Norway, Australia, an Dijibouti.
I confess to not being a moral pragmatist but I also have some misgivings about the 100 dollar laptop idea.
I saw a great presentation At XX several years back by an African film-maker, she said the way people used technology in Africa differed dramatically from the way it was used here, simplye because it was far less embedded. So generally towns had one phone and one tv and thus technology became very communal.
Historically hacking has been a fairly solitary activity. Projects are usually done by groups but the bonds created are light and flexible, not deep and with associated kinship meanings.
thus I see a coupl eof problems in implementing indvidually owned cheap laptops.
#1/ I think it’s putting the cart before the horse for a lot of reasons. mostly those f public safety and health. ie; (taken from the MIT website )
In one Cambodian village where we have been working, there is no electricity, thus the laptop is, among other things, the brightest light source in the home.
oh right, let me just wind the laptop so i can feed you this penicilin
that was just airdropped in to save us from our contaminated watersource.
I guess this is the same as saying in your way that people will rob and steal even if they have laptops because lap-tops simply do not address some of the more pressing needs in developing nations.
Providing a means to an education via the lap tops is also a weirdly protestant approach to dire poverty (just learn/work your way out of it you people, don’t expect our help..)
I just don’t think its up to the kids with the laptops to make moral choices vis their use of the technology. The moral exists in the decision (on the part of developed nations) to give laptops in the first place - instead of say, easy access to generic drugs and clean water.
#2/ It re-inscribes the idea of one peice of technology per person, instead of exploring ways that technology can be shared.
also from the MIT website
One does not think of community pencils—kids have their own. They are tools to think with, sufficiently inexpensive to be used for work and play, drawing, writing, and mathematics. A computer can be the same, but far more powerful. Furthermore, there are many reasons it is important for a child to “own” something—like a football, doll, or book—not the least of which being that these belongings will be well-maintained through love and care.
and also communism is bad.. did we mention that - cuz it is.
I personally own hundreds of pencils none of which I particlarly love. I still learned to write and think just fine - without caring too much about what tools I was using. Ibid computers. I didn’t own one until I was 25 so - if that’s the measure forget it.
Ownership is a pervasive preamble to consumerism.
One prop is merited. I like the decision to use tiny hard-drives, it looks like they are expecting the systems to use a mostly web based os in the future - which will eventually make the laptops exchangeable and not neccesarily require a 1: 1 ratio.
Although now, on further thought how are they going to enforce this 1:1 thing anyways I bet the laptops will become collective property regardless.
hackers = meh, does the world really need more hackers? I think it needs more philosophers, innovators and caregivers at this point. I don’t know if a wind-up laptop is going to encourage any of those qualities.
ps; your presentation was awesome and I really want to borrow your little recording device and go sing under an overpass some quiet evening? I’ll trade you my dog to walk?
Comment by mir — November 25, 2005 @ 2:39 pm
hacker-myth
thinking lots about the hacker-myth, autism, raven (trickster), prometheus. Remember those articles 4-5 years ago about high-rates of autistic/assperger children in silicon valley. are some mental illnesses transhistorical/transculutural? or are they a…
Trackback by mtl3p — November 25, 2005 @ 3:12 pm
Did your friend Mike consider that giving laptops to everyone might equally well produce a nation of file-swapping, porn-watching, video-game-playing slugabeds? A laptop can be used in many ways, and most of them are not “hacking”.
Comment by Nick — November 26, 2005 @ 6:43 pm
This discussion raises once again some of the issues I have with the elision of technology and values — especially the assumption that compters will make people into anything. It is almost impossible in a technological society to consider what other things technologies mean. Technologies are ways of making sense of things. Computers no more make hackers than knives make chefs as opposed to assassains. So I am wary of plans like this one. In addition, hacker culture is in many ways an urban phenomenon, and a middle-class one. What kinds of computer cultures emerge outside of these centres of relative power?
Comment by alison — November 27, 2005 @ 3:54 pm
In all my discussions of this project over the week-end the recurrent meme has been that one about porn watching kids in developing nations.
what a bunch of cynics, ( I include myself in this catagery )
Allison, you use language like a scalpel, watch out now. You make me realize I really do need to go back to school if I want to make effective arguments, you’re like a bloody word ninja..
“computers no more make hackers than knives make chefs” should be put on a tee-shirt.
Comment by mir — November 27, 2005 @ 10:37 pm
hmm lots to ponder here. it’s true that computers are just tools, and tools can be used for good bad, ugly and pretty…this is my worry. that without the moral/societal structures around “tools,” something which is good somewhere will be destructive elsewhere. parachuting laptops into congo won’t end the civil war.
I keep thinking of that movie from the 80s, the Gods Must be Crazy, about the coke bottle that falls from the sky into a remote african village and at first is revered, but finally ends up wreaking havock. (I have no idea how that movie stands up to time, artistically or politically). anyway, how’s a laptop going to fare.
But there is one thing certain, computers + new free software + web has meant so much more creation and communication (blogs, podcasts, vlogs among other things) and this I think is a fundementally good thing. and could be very powerful in places where the present and future do not have much to offer, perhaps this ability to communicate across the globe will have some transformative effect? for instance recording the voices of elders.
That’s yet another in a long line of projects I would like to be involved in…using podcastign to help communities preserve their past & heritage, thru interviews.
These sorts of things are useful and good, I think, and worthwhile. but will the $100 laptop end up doing this? probably in part, plus lots of porn and video games, and lots of other things too. maybe in aids-torn africa, more porn wouldn’t be such a terrible thing? who knows?
but if you look at the efforts of the internet archive, wikipedia, and even my little project Librivox, you see what Massive power for good these things have, and you can imagine their goodness extending into poor countries, along with lots of problems.
Comment by hugh — November 28, 2005 @ 10:42 am
Like many other people I’m skeptical about this initiative. I don’t think p0rN will be the biggest problem. I would say that this laptop will simply remain in the corner of the “house”… if not sold. Why ?
First point : the tool doesn’t make the craftman (already said by Allison)
Second : african ethnies mostly have an oral tradition. Podcast is very interesting for them. But a tool you interact with through a keyboard won’t do it
Third : you talk about education, values, etc. But who said that parents will let their children become more intelligent (or at least do things they won’t understand). Many african countries have a large majority of muslim/animists belief/patriarcal organsation. And you can be sure that the Man of the house (the father) of a family won’t let this come in easily. (and girls will never have access to this)
That’s a long comment but let me tell you about a story from an article in international management : once a NGO brought enough money to dig a water well close to a village instead of 2 hours far by walk. After some months, the NGO found the well broken. Then finaly discovered that is was the men of the village who broke it. Why ? because it was a way for them to say which wife was the prefered one (sort of punishment for the other ones). There are tons of habits, of way of understanding things that have symbolic values there that we can’t understand from here. IMO, those toys will remain unused, and there could be a better allocation for this money.
Comment by Hoedic — November 28, 2005 @ 10:09 pm
Just to clarify, I didn’t want to imply that pr0n per se was going to be a problem. It was merely an example of a non-hacking activity that people can, and would, do. Anyway, what Alison said.
Comment by Nick — November 29, 2005 @ 9:59 am
more pondering…
the tool doesn’t make a craftsman: again, i think this is cynical … how bout, give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, teach a man to fish…this goes to my point that what goes with the computers (training) may be as important than the computers themselves. I think we have to be careful not to say: “I don’t think those africans will use their computers properlly, so they shouldn’t get them.”
oral: I am not sure that the oral tradition, cited by Hoedic, will be a problem - we’re talking about kids here, and giving them a toy that is also going to be the key to much information (among other things). they will play vid games, certainly. what else they do is uncertain. I would hope they would blog and podcast. that in itself would make me happy: i think those are inherently good things — don’t be such a cynic, nick! — because they encourage communication, as well as massive procrastination.
internal restrictions: worries that parents won’t let their kids use the computers, too, seems to me an unconvincing argument. If indeed it were the case, then the laptops would be just a waste of money (and I guess mean that there’d be no books left!), but this worry again seems to me presumptuous and a little patronizing. maybe they would be used, maybe they wouldn’t. but you could say the same of, say, pouring money into a top-flight universiity, and providing scholarships galore. but, my real worry is not that the laptops don’t get used, but that they cause real dammage to society.
the well: again, I think it’s a bit presumptuous to say we should halt all well-digging in africa because of one — or 1000 — problems in particular projects. the real problem is if the wells cause major damage to the structures of the society and make people worse off rather than better. we like to march around the world imagining the great things we’ll accomplish for the good of others, but often we do more harm. the structures of “foreign aid” are not particularly positive, I don’t think — is africa better or worse off than it was 20 years ago.
this could well be another in a long line of projects that we dream up in the north for the “benefit” of the south … that does more harm than good, and serves to reinforce the same unfair global structures that benefit the north rather than the south.
I am not convinced either way. I mistrust big projects - still the idea of millions of new hackers is nice, and all the blogs we’ll have to read coming from new perspectives will be a good thing — wouldn’t it be better to be having some actual africans comment on this post rather than a bunch of white middle-class north americans pontificating on something that, iun the end, has nothing to do with them?
as for the cost: the laptop is being sold this way: a child “costs” about 20$ per yr in textbooks - instead of using textbooks, how bout computers? pays for itself in 5 years. One hopes this is accompanied by a proliferation of good wikibooks.
Comment by hugh — November 29, 2005 @ 11:12 am
I don’t want to be cynical :p
My point is that they will accept to sell those laptops only if a country buys many thousands of them (that’s what Negroponte said). It’s more that possible that there will get few follows up with so many computer, few training. And such training are needed !
My example about the wells doesn’t say that developed country shouldn’t help building some wells (else there’s nothing to do). The fact is that from an ousider point of view you don’t know what’s the impact of your project. The hope is that is could be positive, but it could be neutral (nobody use it) or bad (break the structures, creates tensions, etc.) In this example, the project team remained in the village for a while, so the repaired and addressed the problem. What if they left ? What if you send the laptop and hope it will have a positive impact by itself. You said it : training, and even more than that : accompaniment
I don’t know what will be the support in terms of training and impact assesment with these laptop, but if it’s not sufficient, the positive impact will remain low. The reason I’m skectical is mostly about what will come *with* these laptop. I’m afraid that it will be the same with medics that are send there ; very few people knows what to do with them. They have huge health problems but local nurses don’t understand what the blood pressure, people don’t take medics that are given to them.
More globally, few people have found a way to provide effecient help to those countries. Sending a medic/water filtering material(/laptops ?) and that’s it that’s all have proved to be an inefficient way.
Comment by Hoedic — November 29, 2005 @ 12:16 pm
hoedic - yeah I agree on that. I don’t trust a big american project to do much good. but i’m more skeptical about poor project conception/implementation, not to mention a total lack of understanding of local reality; wrong-headed — even dangerous — assumptions about what’s good for people… that is my worries have more to do with who will implement the project, more than the people receieving the computers.
But i,ll reserve judgement … let’s see what happens.
Comment by hugh — November 29, 2005 @ 12:35 pm
warning - sarcasm.
“computers no more make hackers than knives make chefs as opposed to assassains”
cute.
i’m talking about the effect that something like the printing press has on a society. they’re talking about flooding entire countries with a very specific kind of technology (and not just laptops - but laptops with a specific programing language on them). I really doubt that this amount of new communication technology *won’t* have a cognitive impact.
but maybe you’re right. maybe there will no impact what-so-ever. or maybe it is completely, absolutely impossible to guess the impact of a project like this. after all - the printing press absolutely can’t have anything resembling the same impact in a non-white, poor culture as it did in a white, affluent one, now can it?
also - good one on “elision”. i had to look that one up.
Comment by mtl3p — November 30, 2005 @ 3:30 am
Pidgin to Creole - the nativization of ICT technologies
I’ve been thinking a bunch about what I said about the $100 dollar laptop project, hugh’s continuation of that discussion, and alison’s response – which I took to mean either that she was arguing that the use of information and…
Trackback by mtl3p — December 1, 2005 @ 4:18 am
forty acres and a 100 dollar laptop
Read this; Forty Acres and a Mule: The Ruined Hope of Reconstruction And then think about giving cheap laptops to kids in developing nations Okay what’s the connection? During reconstruction freed slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule. This…
Trackback by The Flink - you gotta learn to love what you own — December 6, 2005 @ 11:39 am