-----Original Message-----
From: Sollie, drs. P. (Paul) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 05 May 2005 15:27
To: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
Subject: RE: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All (NYT)
Dear All,
I do not know any sociologiocal or psychological evidence that online
education works as well as traditional methods, but as a
philospher/ethicist I can direct you to a vigorous criticism against
this view, which you might probably be familiar with, namely Hubert
Dreyfus's book 'On the Internet'.
Paul Sollie
Ethics Institute
Universiteit van Utrecht
Heidelberglaan 2
3584 CS Utrecht
The Netherlands
[e] [log in to unmask]
[w] http://www.ethics.uu.nl
[e] [log in to unmask]
[w] http://www.ethicsoftechnology.com
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] Namens J Armitage
Verzonden: donderdag 5 mei 2005 13:25
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All
(NYT)
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 05 May 2005 12:23
To: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All
(NYT)
Dave/All
I've never thought of CSL as a discussion list but an information
distribution system..
Actually it seems worse than you imagine because it makes the assumption
that pedagogy is not founded on human relationships at all and that you
as teachers and lecturers can be replaced by remote systems produced by
people like me.
I'd rather like to know if there is any evidence that online learning
works as well as traditional methods ?
s
> From: D F J Wood [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 05 May 2005 09:52
> To: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
> Subject: RE: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All
> (NYT)
>
> Excuse me for being cynical, but isn't this all just another version
> of the 'geography is history' argument that basically ignored real
> world geographies in favour of cyber-boosterism?
>
> There's plenty of geographical work out there shows how real-world and
> virtual geographies are not actually going this way, and how uneven
> development, inequalities and exclusions are simply reconfigured
> (either in locational or scalar terms) by ICT developments.
>
> David.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
>>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of J Armitage
>>Sent: 05 May 2005 09:42
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All
>>(NYT)
>>
>>
>>From: Shaun Hides [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>Sent: 04 May 2005 11:38
>>To: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
>>Subject: Re: [CSL]: RE: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All
>>(NYT)
>>
>>In response to Thomas Friedman and Patricia Gray
>>
>>We also need to reflect as acdemics - hopefully engaged ones - that
>>these issues are of concern as more than just an object of study. It
>>seems hard to imagine that anything calling itself a University will,
>>in the near future, dispense with the face-to-face tutor-student
>>exchange that makes this experience what it is. But there are numerous
>>indications that seem to bring the Flat-earth challenge closer to
>>home.
>>
>>These would include: the moves towards a 'global market' in higher
>>education - with all that this implies (unitising and re-packaging
>>content, marketisation and commodification, etc.
>>, the increasing tendency to view research, publication and learning
>>content as intellectual property, the early skirmishes in the WTO's
>>extension of the de-regulation agenda to Higher Education as aspect of
>>the service sector industries. Central to all of this is the role of
>>online learning, particularly as the new mode of distance learning.
>>
>>Clearly, shortly after the collapse of the UKeU ( UK
>>e-University) project, there is a very mixed picture in terms of the
>>pace and extension of e-learning, VLEs and the more general
>>
>>use of ICTs within HE. But most participants in H.E. in all developed
>>countries ( largely
>>
>>those at the helm of Friedman's first two globalisation waves) take
>>for granted the ubiquity of basic computing facilities.
>>But what will be the effects of the extension of 'flat-earth'
>>globalisation to the academy - has anyone begun to contemplate this
>>very seriously? This new mobility of capitalisation of labour has also
>>been glossed by Bill Gates as Friction-free Capital, which sounds
>>pleasant enough when described from the consumer's point of view in
>>terms of commodities like CDs. But how will this work (and
>>feel) when the commodity that becomes continually re-packaged,
>>multiply redistributed and delivered through the Web as a down-load
>>from an outsourced e-Hub is: 109NM Introduction to the Information
>>Society.
>>
>>This is not intended as a reactionary-luddist call for us to erect the
>>barricades, in defence of the relative global privileges of the elites
>>in developed countries. Rather my comments mark a sadness that one of
>>the greatest failures of academics in developed countries lies in
>>their inability to make common cause with colleagues internationally.
>>International relationships between universities are often little more
>>than exercises in revenue diversification through student recruitment.
>>The current model of large international project - usually
>>prestigious science/technology project - of course buys-in absolutely
>>to the marketised conception of HE and therefore constitutes no
>>defence against this version of transformation. Another response will
>>be for the fleeter footed academics to cash in on the transformation -
>>be the facilitators of this flattening process. Isn't that what Tom
>>Friedman's punch-line quotation, "A crisis is a terrible thing to
>>waste", can be seen to imply?
>>
>>Turkeys who vote for Christmas are foolish (if not as rare as we might
>>believe), and I have no desire to see my career and livelihood
>>outsourced. However, the rapidly transforming economic and
>>technological landscape implies that this prospect in some form must
>>be contemplated. The solution is unlikely to be found inside a
>>protectionist ivory tower, instead the connections between academics
>>in universities on different continents
>>- and at different 'altitudes' in this flattening Earth need to be
>>established on grounds that don't fit within a KPT (Knowledge Transfer
>>Partnership) or an intellectual property rights contract. If we leave
>>this to the market, or think that we can ride the wave as
>>crisis-surfers, we are more than likely to be disappointed. There will
>>be few places on that particular raft (surfboard) and ironically in
>>the face of a bullish HE market, only the most entrenched elite
>>positions:
>>Oxbridge, Ivy League, etc. which will have a sufficiently strong brand
>>identity (and thereby income base) to retain a traditional teaching
>>mode. For most of us the question will be, not whether we will be
>>"distributed" but how, how far and on what terms.
>>
>>Shaun Hides
>>
>>J Armitage wrote:
>>
>>> From:[log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> We have had direct experience of this in my home town - a large
>>> clearing bank closed it's local call centre and moved it to
>>India, or
>>> somewhere similar. There was a great deal of protest which the bank
>>> chose to ignore. Many jobs were lost, as well as some
>>customers! Until
>>> the global economy has 'levelled out' to incorporate wages (the same
>>> rate for the same job, whether it is carried out in
>>Bangladesh, Boston
>>> or Bristol), it would seem this exodus to countries where 'running
>>> costs' are lower will continue.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of J Armitage
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:15 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: [CSL]: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All (NYT)
>>>
>>> From: Patrice Riemens [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: 29 April 2005 09:25
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Thomas Friedman: It's a Flat World, After All (NYT)
>>>
>>> +++++++++++
>>> New York Times:
>>> April 3, 2005
>>> It's a Flat World, After All
>>> By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
>>>
>>> In 1492 Christopher Columbus set sail for India, going west. He had
>>> the Nina, the Pinta and the Santa Maria. He never did find
>>India, but
>>> he called the people he met "Indians" and came home and reported to
>>> his king and queen: "The world is round." I set off for India 512
>>> years later. I knew just which direction I was going. I went east. I
>>> had Lufthansa business class, and I came home and reported
>>only to my
>>> wife and only in a
>>> whisper: "The world is flat."
>>>
>>> And therein lies a tale of technology and geoeconomics that is
>>> fundamentally reshaping our lives -- much, much more quickly
>>than many
>>> people realize. It all happened while we were sleeping, or rather
>>> while we were focused on 9/11, the dot-com bust and Enron -- which
>>> even prompted some to wonder whether globalization was over.
>>Actually,
>>> just the opposite was true, which is why it's time to wake up and
>>> prepare ourselves for this flat world, because others
>>already are, and
>>> there is no time to waste.
>>>
>>> I wish I could say I saw it all coming. Alas, I encountered the
>>> flattening of the world quite by accident. It was in late
>>February of
>>> last year, and I was visiting the Indian high-tech capital,
>>Bangalore,
>>>
>>> working on a documentary for the Discovery Times channel about
>>> outsourcing. In short order, I interviewed Indian entrepreneurs who
>>> wanted to prepare my taxes from Bangalore, read my X-rays from
>>> Bangalore, trace my lost luggage from Bangalore and write my new
>>> software from Bangalore. The longer I was there, the more upset I
>>> became -- upset at the realization that while I had been off
>>covering
>>> the 9/11 wars, globalization had entered a whole new phase,
>>and I had
>>> missed it. I guess the eureka moment came on a visit to the
>>campus of
>>> Infosys Technologies, one of the crown jewels of the Indian
>>> outsourcing and software industry.
>>> Nandan Nilekani, the Infosys C.E.O., was showing me his global
>>> video-conference room, pointing with pride to a wall-size
>>> flat-screen TV, which he said was the biggest in Asia. Infosys, he
>>explained, could
>>> hold a virtual meeting of the key players from its entire
>>global supply
>>> chain for any project at any time on that supersize screen. So its
>>> American designers could be on the screen speaking with their Indian
>>> software writers and their Asian manufacturers all at once.
>>That's what
>>> globalization is all about today, Nilekani said. Above the
>>screen there
>>> were eight clocks that pretty well summed up the Infosys workday:
>>> 24/7/365. The clocks were labeled U.S. West, U.S. East,
>>G.M.T., India,
>>> Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Australia.
>>>
>>> "Outsourcing is just one dimension of a much more fundamental thing
>>> happening today in the world," Nilekani explained. "What
>>happened over
>>> the last years is that there was a massive investment in technology,
>>> especially in the bubble era, when hundreds of millions of dollars
>>> were invested in putting broadband connectivity around the world,
>>> undersea cables, all those things." At the same time, he added,
>>> computers became cheaper and dispersed all over the world, and there
>>> was an explosion of e-mail software, search engines like Google and
>>> proprietary software that can chop up any piece of work and send one
>>> part to Boston, one part to Bangalore and one part to
>>Beijing, making
>>> it easy for anyone to do remote development. When all of
>>these things
>>> suddenly came together around 2000, Nilekani said, they "created a
>>> platform where intellectual work, intellectual capital, could be
>>> delivered from anywhere. It could be disaggregated, delivered,
>>> distributed, produced and put back together again -- and this gave a
>>> whole new degree of freedom to the way we do work,
>>especially work of
>>> an intellectual nature. And what you are seeing in Bangalore
>>today is
>>> really the culmination of all these things coming together."
>>>
>>> At one point, summing up the implications of all this, Nilekani
>>> uttered a phrase that rang in my ear. He said to me, "Tom,
>>the playing
>>> field is being leveled." He meant that countries like India were now
>>> able to compete equally for global knowledge work as never before --
>>> and that America had better get ready for this. As I left
>>the Infosys
>>> campus that evening and bounced along the potholed road back to
>>> Bangalore, I kept chewing on that phrase: "The playing field
>>is being
>>> leveled."
>>>
>>> "What Nandan is saying," I thought, "is that the playing field is
>>> being flattened. Flattened? Flattened? My God, he's telling me the
>>> world is flat!"
>>>
>>> Here I was in Bangalore -- more than 500 years after
>>Columbus sailed
>>> over the horizon, looking for a shorter route to India using the
>>> rudimentary navigational technologies of his day, and
>>returned safely
>>> to prove definitively that the world was round -- and one of India's
>>> smartest engineers, trained at his country's top technical institute
>>> and backed by the most modern technologies of his day, was
>>telling me
>>> that the world was flat, as flat as that screen on which he
>>can host a
>>> meeting of his whole global supply chain. Even more interesting, he
>>> was citing this development as a new milestone in human
>>progress and a
>>> great opportunity for India and the world -- the fact that
>>we had made
>>> our world flat!
>>>
>>> This has been building for a long time. Globalization 1.0 (1492 to
>>> 1800) shrank the world from a size large to a size medium, and the
>>> dynamic force in that era was countries globalizing for
>>resources and
>>> imperial conquest. Globalization 2.0 (1800 to 2000) shrank the world
>>> from a size medium to a size small, and it was spearheaded by
>>> companies globalizing for markets and labor. Globalization
>>3.0 (which
>>> started around 2000) is shrinking the world from a size small to a
>>> size tiny and flattening the playing field at the same time.
>>And while
>>> the dynamic force in Globalization 1.0 was countries globalizing and
>>> the dynamic force in Globalization 2.0 was companies
>>globalizing, the
>>> dynamic force in Globalization 3.0 -- the thing that gives it its
>>> unique character -- is individuals and small groups globalizing.
>>> Individuals must, and can, now
>>> ask: where do I fit into the global competition and opportunities of
>>> the day, and how can I, on my own, collaborate with others globally?
>>> But Globalization 3.0 not only differs from the previous eras in how
>>> it is shrinking and flattening the world and in how it is empowering
>>> individuals. It is also different in that Globalization 1.0 and 2.0
>>> were driven primarily by European and American companies and
>>> countries. But going forward, this will be less and less true.
>>> Globalization 3.0 is not only going to be driven more by individuals
>>> but also by a much more diverse -- non-Western, nonwhite -- group of
>>> individuals. In Globalization 3.0, you are going to see
>>every color of
>>> the human rainbow take part.
>>>
>>> "Today, the most profound thing to me is the fact that a
>>14-year-old
>>> in Romania or Bangalore or the Soviet Union or Vietnam has all the
>>> information, all the tools, all the software easily
>>available to apply
>>> knowledge however they want," said Marc Andreessen, a co-founder of
>>> Netscape and creator of the first commercial Internet browser. "That
>>> is why I am sure the next Napster is going to come out of
>>left field.
>>> As bioscience becomes more computational and less about wet labs and
>>> as all the genomic data becomes easily available on the Internet, at
>>> some point you will be able to design vaccines on your laptop."
>>>
>>> Andreessen is touching on the most exciting part of
>>Globalization 3.0
>>> and the flattening of the world: the fact that we are now in the
>>> process of connecting all the knowledge pools in the world together.
>>> We've tasted some of the downsides of that in the way that Osama bin
>>> Laden has connected terrorist knowledge pools together through his
>>> Qaeda network, not to mention the work of teenage hackers
>>spinning off
>>> more and more lethal computer viruses that affect us all. But the
>>> upside is that by connecting all these knowledge pools we are on the
>>> cusp of an incredible new era of innovation, an era that will be
>>> driven from left field and right field, from West and East and from
>>> North and South. Only 30 years ago, if you had a choice of
>>being born
>>> a B student in Boston or a genius in Bangalore or Beijing, you
>>> probably would have chosen Boston, because a genius in Beijing or
>>> Bangalore could not really take advantage of his or her talent. They
>>> could not plug and play globally. Not anymore. Not when the world is
>>> flat, and anyone with smarts, access to Google and a cheap wireless
>>> laptop can join the innovation fray.
>>>
>>> When the world is flat, you can innovate without having to
>>emigrate.
>>> This is going to get interesting. We are about to see creative
>>> destruction on steroids.
>>>
>>> How did the world get flattened, and how did it happen so fast?
>>>
>>> It was a result of 10 events and forces that all came
>>together during
>>> the 1990's and converged right around the year 2000. Let me
>>go through
>>> them briefly. The first event was 11/9. That's right -- not
>>9/11, but
>>> 11/9. Nov. 9, 1989, is the day the Berlin Wall came down, which was
>>> critically important because it allowed us to think of the
>>world as a
>>> single space. "The Berlin Wall was not only a symbol of
>>keeping people
>>> inside Germany; it was a way of preventing a kind of global view of
>>> our future," the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen said. And
>>> the wall went down just as the windows went up -- the breakthrough
>>> Microsoft Windows 3.0 operating system, which helped to flatten the
>>> playing field even more by creating a global computer interface,
>>> shipped six months after the wall fell.
>>>
>>> The second key date was 8/9. Aug. 9, 1995, is the day Netscape went
>>> public, which did two important things. First, it brought
>>the Internet
>>> alive by giving us the browser to display images and data stored on
>>> Web sites. Second, the Netscape stock offering triggered the dot-com
>>> boom, which triggered the dot-com bubble, which triggered
>>the massive
>>> overinvestment of billions of dollars in fiber-optic
>>> telecommunications cable. That overinvestment, by companies like
>>> Global Crossing, resulted in the willy-nilly creation of a global
>>> undersea-underground fiber network, which in turn drove down
>>the cost
>>> of transmitting voices, data and images to practically zero,
>>which in
>>> turn accidentally made Boston, Bangalore and Beijing next-door
>>> neighbors overnight. In sum, what the Netscape revolution did was
>>> bring people-to-people connectivity to a whole new level. Suddenly
>>> more people could connect with more other people from more different
>>> places in more different ways than ever before.
>>>
>>> No country accidentally benefited more from the Netscape
>>moment than
>>> India. "India had no resources and no infrastructure," said Dinakar
>>> Singh, one of the most respected hedge-fund managers on Wall Street,
>>> whose parents earned doctoral degrees in biochemistry from the
>>> University of Delhi before emigrating to America. "It
>>produced people
>>> with quality and by quantity. But many of them rotted on the
>>docks of
>>> India like vegetables. Only a relative few could get on
>>ships and get
>>> out. Not anymore, because we built this ocean crosser, called
>>> fiber-optic cable. For decades you had to leave India to be a
>>> professional. Now you can plug into the world from India. You don't
>>> have to go to Yale and go to work for Goldman Sachs." India could
>>> never have afforded to pay for the bandwidth to connect brainy India
>>> with high-tech America, so American shareholders paid for it. Yes,
>>> crazy overinvestment can be good. The overinvestment in railroads
>>> turned out to be a great boon for the American economy. "But the
>>> railroad overinvestment was confined to your own country and
>>so, too,
>>> were the benefits," Singh said. In the case of the digital
>>railroads,
>>> "it was the foreigners who benefited." India got a free ride.
>>>
>>> The first time this became apparent was when thousands of Indian
>>> engineers were enlisted to fix the Y2K -- the year 2000 -- computer
>>> bugs for companies from all over the world. (Y2K should be a
>>national
>>> holiday in India. Call it "Indian Interdependence Day," says Michael
>>> Mandelbaum, a foreign-policy analyst at Johns Hopkins.) The
>>fact that
>>> the Y2K work could be outsourced to Indians was made possible by the
>>> first two flatteners, along with a third, which I call "workflow."
>>> Workflow is shorthand for all the software applications,
>>standards and
>>> electronic transmission pipes, like middleware, that connected all
>>> those computers and fiber-optic cable. To put it another way, if the
>>> Netscape moment connected people to people like never
>>before, what the
>>> workflow revolution did was connect applications to applications so
>>> that people all over the world could work together in
>>manipulating and
>>> shaping words, data and images on computers like never before.
>>>
>>> Indeed, this breakthrough in people-to-people and
>>> application-to-application connectivity produced, in short
>>order, six
>>> more flatteners -- six new ways in which individuals and companies
>>> could collaborate on work and share knowledge. One was
>>"outsourcing."
>>> When my software applications could connect seamlessly with all of
>>> your applications, it meant that all kinds of work -- from
>>accounting
>>> to software-writing -- could be digitized, disaggregated and shifted
>>> to any place in the world where it could be done better and cheaper.
>>> The second was "offshoring." I send my whole factory from Canton,
>>> Ohio, to Canton, China. The third was "open-sourcing." I write the
>>> next operating system, Linux, using engineers collaborating together
>>> online and working for free. The fourth was "insourcing." I let a
>>> company like UPS come inside my company and take over my whole
>>> logistics operation -- everything from filling my orders online to
>>> delivering my goods to repairing them for customers when they break.
>>> (People have no idea what UPS really does today. You'd be amazed!).
>>> The fifth was "supply-chaining." This is Wal-Mart's specialty. I
>>> create a global supply chain down to the last atom of efficiency so
>>> that if I sell an item in Arkansas, another is immediately made in
>>> China. (If Wal-Mart were a country, it would be China's
>>eighth-largest
>>> trading partner.) The last new form of collaboration I call
>>> "informing" -- this is Google, Yahoo and MSN Search, which now allow
>>> anyone to collaborate with, and mine, unlimited data all by
>>> themselves.
>>>
>>> So the first three flatteners created the new platform for
>>> collaboration, and the next six are the new forms of collaboration
>>> that flattened the world even more. The 10th flattener I call "the
>>> steroids," and these are wireless access and voice over Internet
>>> protocol (VoIP). What the steroids do is turbocharge all these new
>>> forms of collaboration, so you can now do any one of them, from
>>> anywhere, with any device.
>>>
>>> The world got flat when all 10 of these flatteners converged around
>>> the year 2000. This created a global, Web-enabled playing field that
>>> allows for multiple forms of collaboration on research and work in
>>> real time, without regard to geography, distance or, in the near
>>> future, even language. "It is the creation of this platform, with
>>> these unique attributes, that is the truly important sustainable
>>> breakthrough that made what you call the flattening of the world
>>> possible," said Craig Mundie, the chief technical officer of
>>> Microsoft.
>>>
>>> No, not everyone has access yet to this platform, but it is
>>open now
>>> to more people in more places on more days in more ways than
>>anything
>>> like it in history. Wherever you look today -- whether it is
>>the world
>>> of journalism, with bloggers bringing down Dan Rather; the world of
>>> software, with the Linux code writers working in online forums for
>>> free to challenge Microsoft; or the world of business, where Indian
>>> and Chinese innovators are competing against and working
>>with some of
>>> the most advanced Western multinationals -- hierarchies are being
>>> flattened and value is being created less and less within vertical
>>> silos and more and more through horizontal collaboration within
>>> companies, between companies and among individuals.
>>>
>>> Do you recall "the IT revolution" that the business press has been
>>> pushing for the last 20 years? Sorry to tell you this, but that was
>>> just the prologue. The last 20 years were about forging, sharpening
>>> and distributing all the new tools to collaborate and
>>connect. Now the
>>> real information revolution is about to begin as all the
>>> complementarities among these collaborative tools start to converge.
>>> One of those who first called this moment by its real name was Carly
>>> Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard C.E.O., who in 2004 began to
>>> declare in her public speeches that the dot-com boom and bust were
>>> just "the end of the beginning." The last 25 years in technology,
>>> Fiorina said, have just been "the warm-up act." Now we are
>>going into
>>> the main event, she said, "and by the main event, I mean an era in
>>> which technology will truly transform every aspect of business, of
>>> government, of society, of life."
>>>
>>> As if this flattening wasn't enough, another convergence
>>> coincidentally occurred during the 1990's that was equally
>>important.
>>> Some three billion people who were out of the game walked, and often
>>> ran, onto the playing field. I am talking about the people of China,
>>> India, Russia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and Central Asia. Their
>>> economies and political systems all opened up during the
>>course of the
>>> 1990's so that their people were increasingly free to join the free
>>> market. And when did these three billion people converge
>>with the new
>>> playing field and the new business processes? Right when it
>>was being
>>> flattened, right when millions of them could compete and collaborate
>>> more equally, more horizontally and with cheaper and more readily
>>> available tools. Indeed, thanks to the flattening of the world, many
>>> of these new entrants didn't even have to leave home to participate.
>>> Thanks to the 10 flatteners, the playing field came to them!
>>>
>>> It is this convergence -- of new players, on a new playing field,
>>> developing new processes for horizontal collaboration -- that I
>>> believe is the most important force shaping global economics and
>>> politics in the early 21st century. Sure, not all three billion can
>>> collaborate and compete. In fact, for most people the world
>>is not yet
>>> flat at all. But even if we're talking about only 10 percent, that's
>>> 300 million people
>>> -- about twice the size of the American work force. And be
>>advised: the
>>> Indians and Chinese are not racing us to the bottom. They
>>are racing us
>>> to the top. What China's leaders really want is that the
>>next generation
>>> of underwear and airplane wings not just be "made in China"
>>but also be
>>> "designed in China." And that is where things are heading. So in 30
>>> years we will have gone from "sold in China" to "made in China" to
>>> "designed in China" to "dreamed up in China" -- or from China as
>>> collaborator with the worldwide manufacturers on nothing to
>>China as a
>>> low-cost, high-quality, hyperefficient collaborator with worldwide
>>> manufacturers on everything.
>>> Ditto India. Said Craig Barrett, the C.E.O. of Intel, "You
>>don't bring
>>> three billion people into the world economy overnight without huge
>>> consequences, especially from three societies" -- like
>>India, China and
>>> Russia -- "with rich educational heritages."
>>>
>>> That is why there is nothing that guarantees that Americans or
>>> Western Europeans will continue leading the way. These new
>>players are
>>> stepping onto the playing field legacy free, meaning that
>>many of them
>>> were so far behind that they can leap right into the new
>>technologies
>>> without having to worry about all the sunken costs of old
>>systems. It
>>> means that they can move very fast to adopt new, state-of-the-art
>>> technologies, which is why there are already more cellphones
>>in use in
>>> China today than there are people in America.
>>>
>>> If you want to appreciate the sort of challenge we are
>>facing, let me
>>> share with you two conversations. One was with some of the Microsoft
>>> officials who were involved in setting up Microsoft's
>>research center
>>> in Beijing, Microsoft Research Asia, which opened in 1998 -- after
>>> Microsoft sent teams to Chinese universities to administer
>>I.Q. tests
>>> in order to recruit the best brains from China's 1.3 billion people.
>>> Out of the 2,000 top Chinese engineering and science
>>students tested,
>>> Microsoft hired 20. They have a saying at Microsoft about their Asia
>>> center, which captures the intensity of competition it takes
>>to win a
>>> job there and explains why it is already the most productive
>>research
>>> team at Microsoft: "Remember, in China, when you are one in
>>a million,
>>> there are 1,300 other people just like you."
>>>
>>> The other is a conversation I had with Rajesh Rao, a young Indian
>>> entrepreneur who started an electronic-game company from Bangalore,
>>> which today owns the rights to Charlie Chaplin's image for mobile
>>> computer games. "We can't relax," Rao said. "I think in the case of
>>> the United States that is what happened a bit. Please look
>>at me: I am
>>> from India. We have been at a very different level before in
>>terms of
>>> technology and business. But once we saw we had an
>>infrastructure that
>>> made the world a small place, we promptly tried to make the best use
>>> of it. We saw there were so many things we could do. We went ahead,
>>> and today what we are seeing is a result of that. There is
>>no time to
>>> rest. That is gone. There are dozens of people who are doing
>>the same
>>> thing you are doing, and they are trying to do it better. It is like
>>> water in a tray: you shake it, and it will find the path of least
>>> resistance. That is what is going to happen to so many jobs -- they
>>> will go to that corner of the world where there is the least
>>> resistance and the most opportunity. If there is a skilled person in
>>> Timbuktu, he will get work if he knows how to access the rest of the
>>> world, which is quite easy today. You can make a Web site
>>and have an
>>> e-mail address and you are up and running. And if you are able to
>>> demonstrate your work, using the same infrastructure, and if people
>>> are comfortable giving work to you and if you are diligent and clean
>>> in your transactions, then you are in business."
>>>
>>> Instead of complaining about outsourcing, Rao said, Americans and
>>> Western Europeans would "be better off thinking about how you can
>>> raise your bar and raise yourselves into doing something better.
>>> Americans have consistently led in innovation over the last century.
>>> Americans whining -- we have never seen that before."
>>>
>>> Rao is right. And it is time we got focused. As a person
>>who grew up
>>> during the cold war, I'll always remember driving down the
>>highway and
>>> listening to the radio, when suddenly the music would stop and a
>>> grim-voiced announcer would come on the air and say: "This
>>is a test.
>>> This station is conducting a test of the Emergency Broadcast
>>System."
>>> And then there would be a 20-second high-pitched siren sound.
>>> Fortunately, we never had to live through a moment in the cold war
>>> when the announcer came on and said, "This is a not a test."
>>>
>>> That, however, is exactly what I want to say here: "This is not a
>>> test."
>>>
>>> The long-term opportunities and challenges that the
>>flattening of the
>>> world puts before the United States are profound. Therefore, our
>>> ability to get by doing things the way we've been doing them
>>-- which
>>> is to say not always enriching our secret sauce -- will not suffice
>>> any more. "For a country as wealthy we are, it is amazing how little
>>> we are doing to enhance our natural competitiveness," says Dinakar
>>> Singh, the Indian-American hedge-fund manager. "We are in a
>>world that
>>> has a system that now allows convergence among many billions of
>>> people, and we had better step back and figure out what it means. It
>>> would be a nice coincidence if all the things that were true before
>>> were still true now, but there are quite a few things you actually
>>> need to do differently. You need to have a much more thoughtful
>>> national discussion."
>>>
>>> If this moment has any parallel in recent American history,
>>it is the
>>> height of the cold war, around 1957, when the Soviet Union
>>leapt ahead
>>> of America in the space race by putting up the Sputnik
>>satellite. The
>>> main challenge then came from those who wanted to put up walls; the
>>> main challenge to America today comes from the fact that all
>>the walls
>>> are being taken down and many other people can now compete and
>>> collaborate with us much more directly. The main challenge in that
>>> world was from those practicing extreme Communism, namely Russia,
>>> China and North Korea. The main challenge to America today is from
>>> those practicing extreme capitalism, namely China, India and South
>>> Korea. The main objective in that era was building a strong
>>state, and
>>> the main objective in this era is building strong individuals.
>>>
>>> Meeting the challenges of flatism requires as comprehensive,
>>> energetic and focused a response as did meeting the challenge of
>>> Communism. It requires a president who can summon the nation to work
>>> harder, get smarter, attract more young women and men to science and
>>> engineering and build the broadband infrastructure, portable
>>pensions
>>> and health care that will help every American become more employable
>>> in an age in which no one can guarantee you lifetime employment.
>>>
>>> We have been slow to rise to the challenge of flatism, in
>>contrast to
>>> Communism, maybe because flatism doesn't involve ICBM missiles aimed
>>> at our cities. Indeed, the hot line, which used to connect
>>the Kremlin
>>> with the White House, has been replaced by the help line, which
>>> connects everyone in America to call centers in Bangalore. While the
>>> other end of the hot line might have had Leonid Brezhnev threatening
>>> nuclear war, the other end of the help line just has a soft voice
>>> eager to help you sort out your AOL bill or collaborate with
>>you on a
>>> new piece of software. No, that voice has none of the menace
>>of Nikita
>>> Khrushchev pounding a shoe on the table at the United
>>Nations, and it
>>> has none of the sinister snarl of the bad guys in "From Russia With
>>> Love." No, that voice on the help line just has a friendly
>>Indian lilt
>>> that masks any sense of threat or challenge. It simply says: "Hello,
>>> my name is Rajiv. Can I help you?"
>>>
>>> No, Rajiv, actually you can't. When it comes to responding to the
>>> challenges of the flat world, there is no help line we can call. We
>>> have to dig into ourselves. We in America have all the basic
>>economic
>>> and educational tools to do that. But we have not been
>>improving those
>>> tools as much as we should. That is why we are in what Shirley Ann
>>> Jackson, the 2004 president of the American Association for the
>>> Advancement of Science and president of Rensselaer Polytechnic
>>> Institute, calls a "quiet crisis"
>>> -- one that is slowly eating away at America's scientific and
>>> engineering base.
>>>
>>> "If left unchecked," said Jackson, the first African-American woman
>>> to earn a Ph.D. in physics from M.I.T., "this could challenge our
>>> pre-eminence and capacity to innovate." And it is our ability to
>>> constantly innovate new products, services and companies
>>that has been
>>> the source of America's horn of plenty and steadily widening middle
>>> class for the last two centuries. This quiet crisis is a product of
>>> three gaps now plaguing American society. The first is an "ambition
>>> gap." Compared with the young, energetic Indians and
>>Chinese, too many
>>> Americans have gotten too lazy. As David Rothkopf, a former official
>>> in the Clinton Commerce Department, puts it, "The real
>>entitlement we
>>> need to get rid of is our sense of entitlement." Second, we have a
>>> serious numbers gap building. We are not producing enough engineers
>>> and scientists. We used to make up for that by importing them from
>>> India and China, but in a flat world, where people can now stay home
>>> and compete with us, and in a post-9/11 world, where we are insanely
>>> keeping out many of the first-round intellectual draft
>>choices in the
>>> world for exaggerated security reasons, we can no longer cover the
>>> gap. That's a key reason companies are looking abroad. The
>>numbers are
>>> not here. And finally we are developing an education gap.
>>> Here is the dirty little secret that no C.E.O. wants to tell
>>you: they
>>> are not just outsourcing to save on salary. They are doing it
>>> because they can often get better-skilled and more productive people
>>than their
>>> American workers.
>>>
>>> These are some of the reasons that Bill Gates, the Microsoft
>>> chairman, warned the governors' conference in a Feb. 26 speech that
>>> American high-school education is "obsolete." As Gates put
>>it: "When I
>>> compare our high schools to what I see when I'm traveling
>>abroad, I am
>>> terrified for our work force of tomorrow. In math and science, our
>>> fourth graders are among the top students in the world. By eighth
>>> grade, they're in the middle of the pack. By 12th grade,
>>U.S. students
>>> are scoring near the bottom of all industrialized nations. . . . The
>>> percentage of a population with a college degree is
>>important, but so
>>> are sheer numbers. In 2001, India graduated almost a million more
>>> students from college than the United States did. China graduates
>>> twice as many students with bachelor's degrees as the U.S., and they
>>> have six times as many graduates majoring in engineering. In the
>>> international competition to have the biggest and best supply of
>>> knowledge workers, America is falling behind."
>>>
>>> We need to get going immediately. It takes 15 years to train a good
>>> engineer, because, ladies and gentlemen, this really is rocket
>>> science. So parents, throw away the Game Boy, turn off the
>>television
>>> and get your kids to work. There is no sugar-coating this: in a flat
>>> world, every individual is going to have to run a little
>>faster if he
>>> or she wants to advance his or her standard of living. When I was
>>> growing up, my parents used to say to me, "Tom, finish your
>>dinner --
>>> people in China are starving." But after sailing to the edges of the
>>> flat world for a year, I am now telling my own daughters, "Girls,
>>> finish your homework -- people in China and India are starving for
>>> your jobs."
>>>
>>> I repeat, this is not a test. This is the beginning of a
>>crisis that
>>> won't remain quiet for long. And as the Stanford economist
>>Paul Romer
>>> so rightly says, "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste."
>>>
>>> ====
>>> This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain
>>> private
>>and
>>> confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee,
>>> please
>>take
>>> no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please reply to
>>> this
>>e-mail
>>> to highlight the error. You should also be aware that all electronic
>>> mail from, to, or within Northumbria University may be the
>>subject of
>>> a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and related
>>> legislation, and therefore may be required to be disclosed to third
>>> parties. This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses
>>> prior to leaving Northumbria University. Northumbria University will
>>> not be liable for any losses as a result of any viruses being passed
>>> on.
>>>
>>>
>>***************************************************************
>>*************
>>********
>>> Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
>>discussion
>>> list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary
>>academic
>>> study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list
>>> please
>>visit:
>>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
>>>
>>***************************************************************
>>*************
>>*********
>>
>>--
>>Dr Shaun Hides
>>Leader Communication Culture and Media Postgraduate Programme Coventry
>>University Priory Street Coventry CV1 5FB
>>
>>Tel.: +44 (0) 2476 887480
>>Fax.: +44 (0) 2476 887440
>>
>>[log in to unmask]
>>
>>***************************************************************
>>*************
>>********
>>Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
>>discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
>>interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
>>manifestations.To join the list please
>>visit:
>>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
>>***************************************************************
>>*************
>>*********
>>
>>
>>====
>>This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain
>>private and confidential information. If you are not the intended
>>addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to
>>anyone. Please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error. You should
>>also be aware that all electronic mail from, to, or within Northumbria
>>University may be the subject of a request under the Freedom of
>>Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and therefore may be
>>required to be disclosed to third parties. This e-mail and attachments
>>have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Northumbria University.
>>Northumbria University will not be liable for any losses as a result
>>of any viruses being passed on.
>>
>>***************************************************************
>>*********************
>>Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
>>discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
>>interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
>>manifestations.To join the list please visit:
>>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
>>***************************************************************
>>**********************
>>
>
>
************************************************************************
****
> ********
> Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
> discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
> interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
> manifestations.To join the list please
> visit:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
>
************************************************************************
****
> *********
>
>
> ====
> This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain
> private and confidential information. If you are not the intended
> addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to
> anyone. Please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error. You should
> also be aware that all electronic mail from, to, or within Northumbria
> University may be the subject of a request under the Freedom of
> Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and therefore may be
> required to be disclosed to third parties.
> This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to
> leaving Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be
> liable for any losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.
>
>
************************************************************************
****
********
> Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
> discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
> interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
> manifestations.To join the list please
> visit:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
>
************************************************************************
****
*********
>
************************************************************************
****
********
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
manifestations.To join the list please
visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
************************************************************************
****
*********
====
This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private
and confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee,
please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please
reply to this e-mail to highlight the error. You should also be aware
that all electronic mail from, to, or within Northumbria University may
be the subject of a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
and related legislation, and therefore may be required to be disclosed
to third parties.
This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to
leaving Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be
liable for any losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.
************************************************************************
************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated
discussion list made up of people who are interested in the
interdisciplinary academic study of Cyber Society in all its
manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
************************************************************************
*************
****************************************************************************
********
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please
visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
****************************************************************************
*********
====
This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private and
confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, please take
no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please reply to this e-mail
to highlight the error. You should also be aware that all electronic mail
from, to, or within Northumbria University may be the subject of a request
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and
therefore may be required to be disclosed to third parties.
This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving
Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be liable for any
losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
