Continued from page 14
on the internet,
it’s really hard to
tell if you’ve done
the equivalent
of ending up in a bad
neighborhood.
what do you see as
the biggest benefit of
the internet? Hooking
people together,
intermediated by
computing; hooking
people to information,
intermediated by a
computer. In the early
days, we thought we
were hooking people to
computers. I remember
in the days of Arpanet,
when email emerged,
the people doing
the funding said we
shouldn’t be doing
something like email;
we should really be
focused on hooking
people to high-power
computing. But to me,
[the benefit] is this
intermediation of people
getting to information
and to each other. The
computer is just the
platform that makes
some of this happen.
what do you see as the
most troubling aspects
of the internet today?
The Internet is a fairly general platform, so all kinds
of things can happen there, including good things
and bad things. The issue we’re dealing with today is,
how do we police and control the bad things without
impairing the good things? This is a problem that has
a technical engineering component but also has a very
social component. The sort of fears that everyday users
have of something bad happening to them — combined
with a sense that even if you’re afraid of it, there’s so
much that’s important happening on the Internet that
you have to use it — is an issue. And for some people,
fear is a reason why they refuse to use it. We have to
help people have good experiences and not bad ones.
You wrote about making the internet “a hospitable
place.” do you think it’s inhospitable now? My
answer really relates to the previous question. On
the Internet, it’s really hard to tell if you’ve done the
equivalent of ending up in a bad neighborhood. It’s
hard to tell if you should be nervous about the experience you’re having. At the superficial level, it’s very
welcoming, it’s “Come to my website,” but there’s
always a little bit of uncertainty as to what’s happening, and it’s really that that makes me think about
16 CompuTerworld MARCH 26, 2012
it being an inhospitable place. It should be a place
where you feel comfortable. For most people, it’s a
place they go every day, but I’m not sure how many of
them feel comfortable going there.
You wrote about the need for society to address
barriers to using the internet. who should lead such
efforts? The question is an interesting one, because it
implies that we need chosen leadership to accomplish
this task. That’s to be studied, not a presumption. If
you look at the essence of what makes the Internet
what it is today, it’s that nobody’s in charge. I would
re-ask this question as: “Do we need leadership in
order to accomplish this?” I think nobody needs to
be in charge, we just all need to understand these
are pressing questions. All that said, this is an issue
where the government should pay attention.
You also wrote about people stepping up to design
and shape the future of the internet. is it possible
to reshape the internet at this point? Let me qualify
my answer by being careful about what the Internet
means. In the beginning of my [Daedalus] essay, I
pointed out that to a technologist, the Internet is a very
small part of the experience. It’s that layer of technology that carries one packet from one area to another.
When we talk about the user experience and how it’s
shaped by the application, the Internet changes very
fast. Look at the speed at which Facebook and Twitter
and Google+ are emerging. Some of the underlying
technology we’ve been trying to change for 10 years,
but that doesn’t change the user experience.
who should step up to do this? Let me answer that
with a pair of quotes. A famous computer scientist
named Alan Kay said, “The best way to predict the
future is to invent it.” My variation on that quote is,
“The best way to predict the future is to invest in it.”
If you look at the early history of the Internet, the
investment was made by the government. Today most
of the investment comes from the private sector. So
what you see today is that most of the incentives to
step up and innovate in this space have been motivated by commercial interests, and that’s fine, but
who else might have a motive to change the Internet?
how do you ensure that those who step up to shape
the future of the internet have beneficial intentions?
The question has a presumption of what is beneficial.
What’s going on today is just a bunch of experiments.
Facebook was an experiment, and it worked. Twitter
was an experiment, and it worked. On the Internet,
there are issues of fraud and privacy and there will be
government interventions, but by and large, I like to
say the benefit in most cases is determined by experimentation [and asking]: Did we meet a need?
– Intervie w by Computerworld contributing writer
mary K. pratt ( marykpratt@verizon.net)