Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 00:56:26 EDT From: Joe Abernathy Subject: File 1--NREN Wrap (or "Joe's Ride at the Houston Chron") ((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following is Joe Abernathy's last story for the Houston Chronicle. We've known Joe since 1990, and have found him a strong supporter of civil liberties in cyberspace. As his knowledge of the the topic has grown, so has the sophistication of his articles. His periodic columns in The Village Voice's "Wired" section have been consistently penetrating commentaries on law, ethics, and policy. We wish Joe the best in his new life. Thanks Joe.)) NREN Wrap -- This is my last story for the Houston Chronicle. It is to appear on April 4, 1993. Please feel free to redistribute it for any non-commercial use. To those of you who have provided so much help these past four years, thanks. It's been a real education. I've accepted the job of Senior Editor-News at PC World magazine, and I'll still be writing the Village Voice Technocracy column, so I hope you'll all stay in touch. My new contact information is P.O. Box 572390, Houston, Texas 77257-2390, joe@blkbox.com. By JOE ABERNATHY Houston Chronicle Staff Writer The specters of class struggle and international economic warfare are casting a shadow over administration hearings on how to build a sophisticated national computer network. Billed as an engine of job growth, a central concern is emerging that the "data superhigh way" promised by Vice President Al Gore and President Bill Clinton during the campaign could produce a large underclass of "information have-nots." Based on an emerging global computer net work known as the Internet, which links up to 12 million people in more than 30 nations, the National Research and Education Network (NREN) is a decade-long project of former Sen. Gore. Gore envisions a future in which oceans of data, including libraries of movies, books and other creative works, would be readily avail able to every home. In selling a $5 billion spending plan focused on the network in 1992, Gore held forth the image of classrooms without walls, sophisticated medical collaborations, and globally competitive small businesses. "The NREN is at all odds the most important and lucrative marketplace of the 21st century," he said in a recent statement. But in trying to make it work, it has become apparent that the NREN remains in many ways a captive of its privileged institutional heritage. Some Americans don't even have telephone service, and many still don't have computers with which to access the net. Two congressional hearings were held in late March concerning the National Information Infrastructure, and a bill has been introduced that would take up where Gore's 1992 High-Performance Computing Act left off _ bringing the net to classrooms, small business and other potentially disenfranchised Americans. Clinton's budget includes an additional $489 million over six years for the network. And while the regional Bells, newspapers and other information giants have been struggling for years over the future of the medium, congressional insiders say that with the in creased attention, a resolution seems likely to be found during the current session of Congress. "What I think is really getting squeezed out is that there hasn't been a genuine, public interest, bottom-up grass roots voice. It's a huge, huge issue," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington offices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the primary champion of civil rights in the new electronic medium. "It's about people, it's about institutions, it's about who gets to connect and on what terms." Observers also fear that the rush to wield the network as an economic weapon could produce dramatic incursions into free speech and other civil liberties. "I'm very concerned that the rhetoric about national competitiveness is transforming itself into a new cold war," said Gary Chapman, director of CPSR's 21st Century Project in Cambridge, Mass. "The concerns of intelligence and other federal agencies including NASA has been to look at technology resources that are not related to military security but to economic benefits as being things that have to be protected by Draconian measures of security." Recent disciplinary actions at NASA Ames Research Center in Northern California seem to support Chapman's concerns. Up to eight of the 11 scientists disciplined in December were targeted because of their participation in politically oriented, international discussion groups hosted on the Internet computer network, according to documents obtained by the Houston Chronicle under the Freedom of Information Act, along with subsequent interviews of NASA Ames personnel. "Some people there were accused of dealing with foreign nationals about non-classified technology issues," said Chapman, whose organization also has made inquiries into the matter. "NASA said the U.S. has to protect its technology assets because of the global environment of competitiveness." The issues are even simpler for Raymond Luh, a subcontracting engineer fired by NASA. Luh, an American of Chinese ancestry, feels that his career was destroyed simply because he joined in one of the thousands of political discussions aired each day over the Internet. "I feel I have been gravely wronged by NASA," Luh said. "I cannot possibly seek employment elsewhere. My reputation as a law-abiding citizen and a hard-working researcher has been tarnished almost beyond repair." NASA refused to comment on the matter. According to FOIA documents provided by NASA's Office of the Inspector General, Luh was fired when "a document containing Chinese writing was found in (Luh's computer). ... Investigation determined that Luh's office computer held a large volume of files relating to his efforts to promote Most Favored Nation trade status for the People's Republic of China. ... Luh was not authorized to use his computer for this activity." To Luh, however, he was only one of the chorus of voices that joined in a fiery debate surrounding fallout from the Tiananmen Square massacre. He wasn't trying to make policy _ he was exercising intellectual freedom, in his spare time. "That's a very dangerous and disturbing kind of trend," said Chapman. "The parallel is with the Cold War and transforming the modes of thinking and the practices of these agencies into new forms of control, even in the absence of militarily significant enemies. We'll start thinking about the Japanese or whatever Pacific Rim country you want to pick as being `enemies,' and intellectual commerce with these people will be a matter of economic security. "The freedom of expression aspect of that is very critical. We want to make sure that this is a system in which people can express themselves freely without repercussions." Observers fear that Luh may be only the first such casualty as federal agencies and special interest groups reshape the Internet into their own model, carving up a pie estimated to be worth $3.5 trillion. While Gore's vision implies the construction of a high-speed, high-tech fiber optic network, a number of counter-proposals are being floated. The Electronic Frontier Foundation _ which earlier made a name for itself with a successful court challenge to the conduct of the Secret Service in a hacker crackdown _ is focusing on building a less powerful, less costly network that could reach more people, more quickly. "Our central concern is that we get from debate to doing something," said Jerry Berman, EFF director. EFF's approach _ endorsed by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass. _ is to build an ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) service atop the telephone network, making a modest level of digital computer transmission available quickly to every home. The more sophisticated fiber optic approach implied by Gore's NREN could be implemented as time and money allow. But few voices have been heard backing ISDN. "The current state of the discussion is turmoil and chaos," said the CPSR's Rotenberg. "It's a mistake to place too much emphasis on any technological configuration. A lot of that energy and those resources would be better spent talking about users and institutions rather than technology and standards. "This is like trying to explain railroads in the 18th century or cars in the 19th century. Here we are in the 20th century, and we know something big is happening right under our feet and we know it has something to do with these new telecommunications technologies. "None of us knows where this is going to take us, but I think people should have some sensitivity to the prospect that the future world we're going to live in is going to be shaped in many ways by the decisions we make today about the information infrastructure." Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253