The Pentagon is building a new internet, cause apparently the old one sucks.
Actually, the internet that the Pentagon is planning on building is intended only for military use to give the soldiers "a God's-eye view" of the battle by providing instant imagery of "all foreign enemies and threats." It will cost over $200 billion over the next decade to build the hardware and software.
I understand that the CIA wants to know everything at all times, and I even welcome Mr. Rumsfeld's statement (this will be the first time I do so) that "the single most transforming thing in our force will not be a weapons system, but a set of interconnections," because it implies a strategic shift from weapons to information as the main weapon we will use against our enemies. Unfortunately, Mr. Rumsfeld and I disagree about the strategical use of information. He expects to exploit it, while I champion education. Just imagine if we announced that we would use $200 billion dollars over the next decade to build schools in the Middle East rather than on our military? Besides the fact that it would earn us great respect in the world (but who needs that when we have a brave steadfast leader like Bush?) its primary objective would accomplish the number one goal needed to truly win the war on terror: educate the ignorant to build tolerance. If we treat the war on terror as a war of attrition, we have much more to lose than they do. But I digress, the main problem with this new internet, or big eye in the sky, is that this is the building block needed to establish a big brother-like state which spies on its civilians because it can't trust them. Whatever the military develops always gets used in civil society anyway. Big companies will want to know where their employees are, parents their children, as well as a thousand different other uses.
I'm not saying this is exactly what will happen. But I definitely don't like the idea of us tapping into God-like powers. All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Sometimes, I am absolutely terrified of the future.
Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/technology/13warnet.html?hp&ex=1100408400&en=27b47c63b0a8e037&ei=5094&partner=homepage
I understand that the CIA wants to know everything at all times, and I even welcome Mr. Rumsfeld's statement (this will be the first time I do so) that "the single most transforming thing in our force will not be a weapons system, but a set of interconnections," because it implies a strategic shift from weapons to information as the main weapon we will use against our enemies. Unfortunately, Mr. Rumsfeld and I disagree about the strategical use of information. He expects to exploit it, while I champion education. Just imagine if we announced that we would use $200 billion dollars over the next decade to build schools in the Middle East rather than on our military? Besides the fact that it would earn us great respect in the world (but who needs that when we have a brave steadfast leader like Bush?) its primary objective would accomplish the number one goal needed to truly win the war on terror: educate the ignorant to build tolerance. If we treat the war on terror as a war of attrition, we have much more to lose than they do. But I digress, the main problem with this new internet, or big eye in the sky, is that this is the building block needed to establish a big brother-like state which spies on its civilians because it can't trust them. Whatever the military develops always gets used in civil society anyway. Big companies will want to know where their employees are, parents their children, as well as a thousand different other uses.
I'm not saying this is exactly what will happen. But I definitely don't like the idea of us tapping into God-like powers. All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Sometimes, I am absolutely terrified of the future.
Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/technology/13warnet.html?hp&ex=1100408400&en=27b47c63b0a8e037&ei=5094&partner=homepage
posted by -R at 1:33 AM
2 Comments:
Well, that's nothing a shotty to the head won't solve eh?
No, it's definetly nothing a shotty to the head wouldn't solve. But I like to think of that as a last resort ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home