• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Technology Policy

J

JFK'sDataRace

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
3
Reaction score
2
Location
Travelling at present
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I am proposing consideration be given to establishing a new forum, forums or sub-forums specifically addressing 'technology policy'. The problem in deciding if and how to do it is similar to the problem that government has managing technology.

Most government departments are touched by technology. There is a technological spin to every aspect of policy. So do you say that each government department manages its own technological issues OR do you somehow centralize technology policy? The challenge is that the existing branches of government are not up to speed with technology, and technologists are not up to speed with the details of the specific policy areas. How does, for example, Artificial Intelligence impact prosaic policy areas - and in a year's time it will have moved on further still.

To get a flavor of "technology policy" have a look at Mark Warner's recent white paper on legislative changes - it is presented in a draft by the way. https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/07/30/warner_social_media_proposal.pdf

There are additional complications . . .

You then have the specific technology policy issues that stand alone - for example, Data Sovereignty, the requirement that specific types of data be stored onshore not offshore. Not part of Warner's agenda, but a standalone technology issue. Not to mention privacy, net neutrality and so on.

Then you have the issues of principle where technology is concerned - how do you interpret an 18th-century constitution in the 21st century . . . should the fourth amendment be amended to include data?

Religion and philosophy are frequent bedmates compare them with technology. John F. Kennedy described "all technology" as having "no conscience of its own", so there are very many ethical issues to consider.

Then there are specific types of technology like Artificial Intelligence which overlaps with everything. Do you address it on its own?

Foreign policy - China challenged the United States to a technology race in July 2017.

I think the religion and philosophy split was elegant. That similar challenge will present itself in relation to technology before too very long.

So, I am just kicking the ball into play . . .

I can't just throw the ball into play and leave it at that.

My suggestion is that it be taken in stages - stage 1, set up a technology policy community and evolve from there.
 
JFK'sDataRace said:
I am proposing consideration be given to establishing a new forum, forums or sub-forums specifically addressing 'technology policy'. The problem in deciding if and how to do it is similar to the problem that government has managing technology.

Most government departments are touched by technology. There is a technological spin to every aspect of policy. So do you say that each government department manages its own technological issues OR do you somehow centralize technology policy? The challenge is that the existing branches of government are not up to speed with technology, and technologists are not up to speed with the details of the specific policy areas. How does, for example, Artificial Intelligence impact prosaic policy areas - and in a year's time it will have moved on further still.

To get a flavor of "technology policy" have a look at Mark Warner's recent white paper on legislative changes - it is presented in a draft by the way. https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/07/30/warner_social_media_proposal.pdf

There are additional complications . . .

You then have the specific technology policy issues that stand alone - for example, Data Sovereignty, the requirement that specific types of data be stored onshore not offshore. Not part of Warner's agenda, but a standalone technology issue. Not to mention privacy, net neutrality and so on.

Then you have the issues of principle where technology is concerned - how do you interpret an 18th-century constitution in the 21st century . . . should the fourth amendment be amended to include data?

Religion and philosophy are frequent bedmates compare them with technology. John F. Kennedy described "all technology" as having "no conscience of its own", so there are very many ethical issues to consider.

Then there are specific types of technology like Artificial Intelligence which overlaps with everything. Do you address it on its own?

Foreign policy - China challenged the United States to a technology race in July 2017.

I think the religion and philosophy split was elegant. That similar challenge will present itself in relation to technology before too very long.

So, I am just kicking the ball into play . . .

I can't just throw the ball into play and leave it at that.

My suggestion is that it be taken in stages - stage 1, set up a technology policy community and evolve from there.
Click to expand...

One part of the problem, in my mind, is two-fold:

1. The inability of people to comprehend these advances, to comprehend the effects of these advances and the inability/desire of people to adapt.

2. The inability of government to formulate and enact policies and laws to deal with the effects of these advances in a timely manner.

This is because the "rate" of technological advancement is ever increasing.

Another part of the problem, in my mind, is the question of whether the government SHOULD have the responsibility to formulate and enact policies and laws to deal with the effects of these technological advances. I'm not so sure it should. That notion goes against my fundamental desire for less government control and more individual choice and responsibility.

Perhaps "stage 1" should be resolving the question of government's role in dealing with the effects of technological advances.
 
Ambitious third post........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom