Thursday, March 4, 2004
SJ Merc Watch: Politics Masquerading as Technology Analysis(I've been a bit quiet the last few. Been busy, in a good way. So this one's had some time to ferment. Ready, aim, ...)Last Sunday's San Jose Mercury carried an 'analysis' piece titled "Why Terrorism Isn't Reshaping Technology" (link may rot). From it, we're to learn that the WOT is having a minimal effect on the research and development agenda of the nation, which is mostly led by commercial concerns anyway. VCs are cautious about the dual use nature of the resulting sensor and other systems. Big vendors like Intel aren't changing their projects to mobilize for the national effort. Nothing to see here, move along. It sounds totally reasonable, and it's totally wrong. The bias is unstated, but let's try a few pull quotes to see if it becomes more obvious: ....develop new ways to keep us safer...See a pattern? The skeptical may follow the link and verify that the article is devoid of mentions of any offensive capability or the technology to support it. The notion that wars are not won on the defensive seems to have escaped the writer, though the Manhattan Project for which he seeks parallels was most definitely a tool of the offense. Why the lacuna? Why the studious avoidance of the technological revolution that is beginning to build up on the offensive? The writer of the 'analysis' piece is one G. Pascal Zachary. While he once wrote for the WSJ and has authored a bio of Vannevar Bush, so far as I can determine he has no background in either technology or investing. What he does have is an easily found track record of political screeds, all on one side. This is an author who has written, with some degree of seriousness: The Nader saga illustrates the dilemma of Bay Area "social democrats." We are, like children in an English novel, not to be seen nor heard.Could there be some relevance of this point of view to the fallacy of the analysis? Might there be some doubt whether the author has a clear view of what is being defended, let alone any notion of victory? And if the author is beginning with a dubious premise, and has no background in technology or business analysis, what are we to make of the output? Once upon a time, the SJ Merc had reasonable pretensions to being the newspaper of Silicon Valley. It had a few reporters and columnists who seriously followed the Valley and the technology and processes that made it tick. But somewhere along the line, whether due to new owners, or too many J-school grads without real experience, all but the pretensions vanished. Balanced treatment turned into bashing and nay-saying. Now the Merc has moved along to 'analysis' that not only reaches fallacious conclusions, but does so by deliberately turning a blind eye to capabilities that may aid us in victory, and fuel new ventures. And this was not some syndicated op-ed piece dropped in to fill up the page. It was specifically commissioned by the Merc, whose editor presumably knew the 'qualifications' of the writer he hired. If the combination of citizens' media and the erosion of classified ad revenue by the Internet eventually does down the Merc, you won't find me crying. So what are these technology shifts that this bogus analysis misses? Just a few. Let's start out with robotics, where we put machines at risk instead of our troops. Those who've been paying attention may have noticed things like Predator UAVs and Packbot scout robots. Contractors involved in these efforts are already producing consumer robots. Next week, DARPA will sponsor a race of fully autonomous vehicles in the California and Nevada desert. After decades of fantasizing about working 'bots, a shooting war is forcing pragmatism. DOD funding is also driving next generation concepts like autonomous robot swarms and new materials such as artificial muscles (PDF file). Because our special forces need portable energy sources as they hunt down and exterminate the terrorists, we're funding new fuel cell architectures and flexible photovoltaics. How about a miniaturized free space optics system for battlefield sensors, happening right up in Berkeley? Working robots, alternative energy, next generation wireless. Nope, nothing to see here. Just forget I mentioned it, I don't need the competition for the good bets.
Next week I'll be attending and blogging from DARPATech 2004 in Anaheim, where I expect to see updates on these and other projects that aren't reshaping technology. Should I happen to run into Mr. Zachary, or any SJ Merc reporter for that matter, I'll let you know. But I'm not holding my breath. |
