BRITISH LIBRARY OF POLITICAL AND CC NOMIC SCIENCE L NOON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND P LITICA L SCIENCE I 0, P R TUGAL STREET, L NOON WC2A 2HO T I. 01-405 7686 servant or master? fabian tract 457 the computer and society chapter 1 introduction 1 2 computers today 3 3 recent developments and control technology 5 4 change and its origins 8 5 current and future policies 11 6 conclusion 16 the authors Tom Crowe is Head of the Division of Systems Analysis at Thames Polytechnic. After graduating in Chemistry at Liverpool University, he worked both in this country and abroad for 15 years (latterly with IB'M) before becoming an academic. He is a member of The 'British Computer Society Privacy Committee and is currently engaged in research into the use of Data Bases. John 'Hywel Jones is a Senior Lecturer in Computer Science at Thames 'Polytechnic. He graduated in 1955 from the Imperial College of Science and Technology with a BSc (Mathematics). Since then he has taught in Cardiff, Geneva and London. He was awarded an MSc. (Computer Science) from City University, tondon, in 1970. He is a member of the British ComputerSociety. this pamphlet, like all publications of the Fabian Society, represents not the collective view of the Society but only the views of the individuals who prepared it. The responsibility of the Society is limited to approving publications it issues as worthy of consideration within the Labour movement. Fabian Society.. 11 Dartmouth Street, London SW1 H 9BN. July 1978 ISSN 0307 7535 'IS'B'N 7163 0457 0 Bernard Shaw took an early interest in the automation of complex tasks. In 1918 he wrote: " In the clinics and hospitals of the near future we may reasonably expect that the doctors will delegate all the preliminary work of diagnosis to machine operators as they now leave the taking of a temperature to a nurse. Such machine work may be only a registra: tion of symptoms ; but I can conceive of machines which would sort out combinations of symptoms and deliver a card stating the diagnosis and treatment according to rule" '(The New Review, 1918). The machine which has made this prediction fact-the electronic digital com- puter-has been with us for three decades. Its thirtieth birthday was celebrated in the press in 1976 and a computer gallery dedicated to the history of computing was opened in the Science Museum in South Kensington. The computer has achieved a certain respectability ; now is a good time to questｷion its social impact. the impact on the social structure The computer is at last looked on as a machine whiCh can change social structure and the organisation of society. Politicians and lawyers are concerned about its powers in collecting and organising a vast quantity of information and the first laws are being enacted to control its use. Society has difficult and complex decisions to make ilf it is to reach an harmonious and beneficial relationship with this ultimate machine. Man must not allow the computer, by default, to define its own role. "The power of custom is enormous, and so gradual will be the change, that . . . our bondage will steal upon us noiselessly and by imperceptible approaches" (Samuel Butler, Erehwon, 1872). The impact that the computer, in its first 30 years, has made on the way we live is trivial when compared with its potential. The ｷvision of its frightening power is there: " The Machine feeds us and clothes us and houses us ; through it we hB spea to on'e another, through it we see one another, in it we have our being. The Machine is the friend of ideas and the enemy of superstition. The Machine is omnipotent, eternal: blessed is the Machine (B M Forster, When the Machine Stops, 1909). The choice then is to surrender to the developing power and control of the computer, to opt for the condition of happy slavery or to attempt to control its use in a more rational society. But before we can use it for our benefit we must understand it better than we do now. At the moment ｷthe public attitude towards computer technology is jaundiced ; the initial eager aspirations of computer scientists have not been realised and people enjoy the recital of anecdotes showing up the computer ｷas being more inconvenient than it was worth. The computer cartoon has become a genre. Reports abound of the clumsy application of the computer; of computers being more inefficient and costly than the human beings ,they replace. It would be extremely foolish to take comfort in these early failures and sit back in the belief that computers will never amount to anything. As the American computer scientist, John McCa:rthy, wrote ten years ago "The computer gives signs of becoming the contemporarycounterpart of the steam engine which brought an the industrial revolution. The computer is an information machine. Information is a commodity no less intangible than energy; if anything, it is more persuasive in human affairs. The command of ｷinformation made possible by the computer should make it possible to reverse the trends towards mass produced uniformity started by the industrial revolution. Taking advantage of this opportunity may present the most urgent engineering, social and political question of the next generation" quoted by W J Freeman (Information, 1966). ~he computer engineer has respondedwith enthusiasm to McCarthy's call. He has perfected systems which have enabled men to go to the moon and back. In the wider field of the social and political implications of computing the issues are less clear cut, the goals less o.bvious and the implications less easily understood. Discussion has been sporadic: certain issues-such as Computers and Prｷivacy-have been debated but wider concerns have gone unexplored. There is little indication that society has responded to John McCarthy's words; far from the computer being used to reverse the trend of mass produced uniformity it is beingused to strengthen the grip of mindless technology. Recent advances in the use of computers to process information have resulted in the development of the technology of control. This more sophisticated control technology can be used in two ways- to chain industrial man to his machines or to promote the coming of a saner and less uniform post-industrial society. We have seen in our lifetimes the enormous impaot of technology: the car in our cities, medical drugs on world populations, the jet aｷircraft on intercontinental transport. The computer is poised to effect a major transformation of the fabric of our society. the need for debate This pamphlet argues that the current image of the computer as an insensitive number cruncher needs to be corrected and that the recent developments which have enhanced its power and capabilities needs to be understood not just by the specialists in contact with the machine but by every well informed person. The way that computers have taken over many of our routine clerｷical tasks in organisations is illustrated: and the next stage is examined, when some of the traditional tasks of management can be machine controlled. This pamphlet also discusses the difficult decisions which need to be taken now and which will determine whether com puters will grow around us symbiotically or parasitically. It then argues that computer scientists must not just playenthusiastically with the new toy they are building ; that they must develop a professional attitude to the power they control. It calls for cooperation between computer scientists and politicians, lawyers and leaders of commerce, industry and trade unions in making a positiveeffort to harness the computer in the service of man. To do this it is necessary to have a methodology. This pamphlet argues for an approach in which every innovation is carefully tested and rejectedif fo.und to be tfalse. It asserts that such a Popperian approach is vital. The aim is an open society where men are given means to increase their stature rather than be degraded into a new proletariat buHied by the tyrant technology. People must be better educated to the possibilities that are available to them in society. There must be open debate and hypotheses about our future developments must be tested. The Popperianapproach, while it might slow down certain advances, g-ives us the best underlying philosophy for forging our future. A socialism without a strategy to tame the computer and press it into the service of mankind will lose by default. Without controls it will be used by companies and governments to maximise their objectives regardless of the adverse social consequences. This pamphlet gives guidelines for the control of the computer and arguesstrongly that it is unsatisfactory for a government (a major user of computer power and a massive manipulator of information) to be the sole arbiter of computer usage. 2. computers today The computer was born in an era -of technological optimism ; man was solvｷ ing more and more problems using technology, progressively harnessing its seemingly unlimited power to developsophisticated drugs, atomic energy, the jet engine and other powerful supports of life in the latter half of the twentieth century. But disillusionment has set in ; unlimited growth and the use of precious resources have been questioned. Pollution, the seemingly inevitable partnerof uncontrolled technology, has been recognised as a problem. From now on it will never be so simple, for technologyis seen as a threat. The computer in those optimistic decades was regarded as a bright new invention with enormous potential. It is now seen as part of the technological threat. It has been seen to fail in fulfilling its initial expectations and ｷis regarded as a clumsy calculator with the proclivity to make stupid mistakes. Only by a few is it seen as a powerful aid for man in the management of his complex technologicalsociety. Nevertheless computers can be a threat to society and the nature of this threat should be examined. A publicwhich is turning away from technology will remain largely ignorant of the enorｷ mous development of computers in the last decade. The arrested image of the computer is of a fast calculator that's capable of sending a bill for nil pence. Meanwhile the computer has made real and steady progress ; for instance the traveller can now book us domestic airｷ line tickets in London and at the same time request special diet meals. Similar progress has been made in many areas directly impinging on but less obvious to the public, ranging from the very fast calculations and decisions that control the use ｷof power stations as demand fluctuates to the presentation of accurate data on vacant beds in hospitals. Indeed without computers the banks could not handle their daily quota of cheques. These developments will so shape our everyday lives that it is desirable for the political well being of a community that it has an informed view of such progress and it is able to understand the threats and the promises inherent in computertechnology. In the public mind, the compueter has thus been assigned to menial administrative tasks. The public disliked it for its inftexibiJ.ity (which demonstrates its stupidity) and its ability to serve as an excuse for changes for the worse in the way things are organised. The media reinforce this image with continued reports of the failure of computer systems, such as the new centralised vehicle registration system at Swansea designed to replace the manually kept records of local authorities. A computer system success is seldom reported. Naturally, a successful vehicle registration system would hardly be a good news story ! The public cannot be blamed for a lack of interest in the clerical processess which are the normal fare of the computers. What should have been reported and debated by the public at large is the creation by the government of a largecentralised data bank of vehicle owners at Swansea, which can be used for purposes other than collection of car tax. What has been created at Swansea, as a hi-product to the business of ｷlicensingvehicles, is a large central bank of readilyaccessable data which contains informaｷ tion about people. This data bank can be made available to the police, customs or tax authorities ; it could eventually be linked with other larger data banks being developed and be the first step to putting on record for immediate retrieval detailed profiles of the individuals who live in this country. This might be good or it might be bad but it is of more importance to discuss this issue than to laugh at the inefficiency of the central licensing system. There is a potential threat in the development of large data banks readily interrogated and up-dated by means of terminals. Paul Armour, a computerscientist, is particularly concerned with the coming of Electronic Funds Transfer Systems which credit cll!rd -organisationssuch as Barclaycard are moving towards. (This system would allow a purchase in a store to be immediately debited to a bank account, via a computer terminal. This would be a "real-time" operation, in that a bank balance would be adjusted at the moment of purchase.) Armour has written "Several years ago I was a member of a team Which was g;venthe assignment of assuming we were data processing advisers to the Russian secret police, the KGB, and that we were to design a system to mainta:in surveillance of all Soviet citizens and foreigners within the ussR boundaries. After some study we decided that the easiest and cheapest way to do it was to install a real-time Electronic tFunds Transfer System. Such a system knows where a person is in real-time as well as what he is buyｷ ing every time he makes a financial transaction. A system that knows Where each individual is represents, to me, a greatsurveillance system for would be tyrants " (Computers and Public Policy, Information Cassets Inc, 1976). The privacy we enjoy at present is due at least partly to the fact that m an u a 1 searches of the files would prove too expensive. Paul Armour expresses misgivings as to whether certain da:ta should be allowed to be on file at all. Records about Jews in certain European countries were used to lethal effect when "inherited" by the Nazis. Adverse publicity has in no way stopped the growth in the use of computerswhich takes place out of public gaze and requires no planning authority. Computer technology, free from publicity, has been able to make steady progress. Like some alien force, it has gradually digested a major part of our manual records, transferring them onto magnetic storage which now b e comes available for easymanipulation. computers in organisations The computer has taken on more tasks within organisations which has resulted in a significant, but almost unnoticed, change in its role. Management is now able to use the computer not only to provide an information system but to assist in the control of an organisation. The model used in management science for an organisation (business, governmerrt agencies, hospitals) is hierarchial. The directors are responsible for determining the strategies and policing of the organisation. The controllers are responsible for the implementation of the policies and for the management of exceptions arising from operations. The operators perform repetitive program- able tasks in the day to day operation of the organisatｷion. It is in the area of operations that the computer has made most progress. In what has been essentially a process of automation, these repetitive, program- able tasks have been ideal breedingground for the early generations of computers. Typical examples of these earlier applications are payroll work, stock reporting and sa:les ledger and boughtledger entries. Later applications have been message switching, production control, order processing and passengerreservation ; here the computer operation has been extended fram a purely clerical or bookkeeping role to an operationalfunction. Each time a computer takes over a repetitive task, it creates a large pool of data related to that task ; for example the hi-product of an invoicing operation(where invoices are printed by computer and sales accounts updated) is a largecomputer file with customers' names and addresses with other pertinent detail and another large file giving the detailed history of transactions with the organisation. The data bank that results as more and more applications are computerisedis now seen as a valuable asset to the organisation. An example of the use of such data is where the ｷAutomobile Association sells information about its members .to Readers Digest who use it as a basis of a mailing list. The computer, having automated the operational tasks and stored the organisation's information in a readily accessible form on a data basis, is able to move into the area of the controllers. 3. recent developments and control technology 30 years on, the computer has developed some of the capacity that was originally envisaged by Bernard Shaw in 1918. We look here at rhe ｷrecent technical advances that have given the computer the capability and potential that was hoped for in the early days. The first and perhaps the most dramatic of these is the development of silicon chips. A microprocessor, the central unit of a computer, is shrunk into a singlesilicon chip one quarter of an inch square. A powerful computer system that would, at one time, have filled rooms with thermionic valves can now be accommodated within the space of this page. The silicon chip, cheap (｣5), fast and easy to manufacture can carry the computer into our daily life. At presentsuch chips are used for pocket calculators, wrist watches and TV games but soon they will be remembering, regulating and executing. A second parallel development has been in the growth of the power and capacity of computers. Computers are now being developed and researched that can manipulate one million million bits of data, enough information for ten thousand hospitals with one thousand patientseach. While most other costs are risingthe cost of information processing is falling. Its cheapness puts computer technology well within the reach of most businesses and makes personal computing possible. Thirdly, the computer programs that "tell " the computer what to do (thesoftware) have been developed to match the more sophisticated demands of managers. Operational research techniques involving millions o'f sophisticatedcalculations are no trouble to a modern computer. 'I1 h us, forecasting models, financial decision models and programing of complex tasks are all done nowadays with the help of the computer. Already as more and more programs are made to work together it is becomingincreasingly difficult for the underlyingassumptions to be fully understood by managers who rely upon the decisions. The danger is that the computer will do what you tell it to do, but 'that may be different from what you intended. So who becomes the servant and who the master? Fourthly network techniques using communication technology and message switching programs make it possible to connect computers and people around the globe. Computer time 'hired in London could well use computers actually located in Holland ar the United States. Academics doing research in London find it convenient to use facilities provided via the ARPA (the Advanced Research Projects Agency) network in the United States. Not only does this make available data and programs they want to use but also the eight hour time zone difference means that a computer on the west coast of the United States can be used for real time computations at nightby Eu~opean customers. Finally there are the attempts that are being made to get computers to perform tasks that have until now been the preserve of man. Artificial Intelligence is the branch of computing which is trying to get a machine to imitate human thoughtprocesses. Hs workers build robots and program computers to play chess or music, recognise human speech and perform question and answer routines in English. Artificial !Intelligence techniques are now becoming available for practical activities. The thought processes essential to chess have been programmed and can be developed for use in organisationspotentially a powerful servant for management. What is there 'to fear ? It would surely be irrational to be complacent when mankind is faced by so much power of a new and potent nature. Civilisation has always changed when a new means of communication has been perfected-thebook, the steam engine, the telephone and television. Computer technology must change society. The growing power of computers must have an enormous effect on our society. But the one development that should be watched with interest is where computer power is able to partner the control process- control technology. control technology Sophisticated techniques using control technology have long ｷexisted in industry to control manufacturing processes. (Indeed the domestic central heating system has its control unit.) With silｷicon chip microprocessors readily available the decisions taken can be more and more sophisticated. The Chips are Down discussion paper published by Earth Resources Research Ltd in 1978 highlights this problem and cites the example of where National Cash Register reduced its work force in manufacturing by more than 50 per cent from 37,000 to 18,000. Modern aircraft depend on computersfor navigation, communication, passenger comfort and safety, engine control and control of aerodynamic surfaces. A logical extension of these decision processes is to program a computer to make social decisions ; a computer could be programmed to allocate social securitybenefits. This trend can be seen in the computerisation of our tax system which has already started in Scotland. This advance of technology has altered the way in which man thinks of himself. Today technology performs many of the tasks we no longer wish to do ourselves -tasks we would often describe as inhuman. Few of us would wish to replace the farm tractor. It is in the area of control that man considers he plays a more essential role, essential to his understanding of himself as a human ; so much so that the exercise of control has traditionally been associated with superiorstatus. As the computer moves into the area of control it is not only taking over essential human tasks but it can dehumanise the resulting decisions. The role of management will change. This trend will have many ramifications and it will be useful to explore some of them. More Efficient Managers. The computercan play two direct roles. One is where it aids the manager and makes him more efficient. The other is where the computer replaces management and decisions are a result of computer programs. The controllers (managers, tax collectors, teachers, civil servants) will become much more powerful with ready access to detailed information. This could be wholly beneficial with managers able to be more efficient, doctors able to seek expert advice and thus make better diagnoses, civil servants able to respond more quickly to queries and demands made upon them. However there are many who would claim that our current freedoms are to some extent a result of having not very efficient managers and that better management would be a mixed blessing. Programed Decisions. Many of the day to day decisions made by the managers could be programed into a computer. An example of this is where a stock control manager can program the computer to automatically reorder material from the supplier when the stock level falls below a level he has set. This can be taken a stage further when, based upon the past history, the computer makes a forecast and " decides " when and how much to order. This uses fairly standard ｷoperational research techniques. There is no reason why for example the complexities of the law should not be computerised. A program called LEGOL has been developed at the LSE for doing just this. Although its use to programlaws may be challenged it would be a useful tool to check parliamentarydraughtsmanship and ensure that laws are at least logical and consistent. This could be helpful with social security. A computer could readily make the calcuｷ lations of the benefits due to an individual case without individual clerks needingto know all the complexities of the law and having to work out the payment due. This could be very helpful but there is a danger that as more and more decisions are programmed in the computer, the managers do not fully understand the decision process or the underlyingassumptions built into the program or use the computer as an excuse or alibi for decisions properly their responsibility. We know of a program which applied quantity discounts to orders, but with a " switch " written into the programthat allowed >the manager to assign any discount he wished. At first the sales manager used the computer to discipline his sales force, explaining to them that the computer could not handle nonstandard discounts. The computer was made to appear more rigid than it actually was. More disturbingly, two years later a new sales manager did not even know of the existence ｷof the override switch. A computer programed as a servant had become the master. As management decisions are explicitly or implicitly wr-itten into programs and as more and more jobs are put on computer, it can become a major task to change the decision program. Automated computer systems tend to be more rigid than the corresponding human ones. Even if computers are not more rigid there tends to be a feeling of helpｷ lessness in the face of -obdurate technoｷ logy. Senior managers who are able to "fix " most situations when dealing with human systems, feel insecure about using their power when faced With a computer system. Centralisation versus Decentralisation. Another issue that will be affected will be that of centralisation versus decentralisation. Without putting forward anyparticular theory to relate information to power, it is reasonable to postulate that the ava-ilability of information is closely related to the location of power. In the past this issue has often been decided by the quality of the available communication. The reduced roles of ambassadors and the phenomenon of Henry Kissinger owes more to the jet plane and the telephone than to the talent of one man. Now, with the efficient access of information wherever it is located the issue of centralisation is open. The computeris neutral; it can make efficient centralｷ isation possible (and therefore surely tempting even where operational considerations might favour otherwise) ; or it can equaHy make for efficient decenｷ tralisation to take place making available to all locations the appropriate infoｷrmation required for decisions. Home based Terminals. 1t is interesting, having witnessed the way everyday life has been affected by the invention of the motor car, to speculate on the effect this improvement in communication and mobility of information will have on the role of urban centres. One could speculate, for example, on the effect of home based terminals. It is conceivable that with such facilities many of the managers concerned with the control of organisations do not need to commute to the urban centres. What effect will this have upon our cities ? Already lecturers can set course work and mark it from a terminal in their own homes. Industrial Democracy. The current groping trends towards some sort of industrial democracy, which should be concerned with the shaｷrｷing of power and decisions. could be frustrated if power has moved from the " seat on the board " by the time it has been achieved. As the control functions of organisations are proｷ grammed in computers, it might be better for workers interested in the sharing of power to concern themselves with the design of the information systems. Employment. The trade union movement is rightly showing concern over the possible unemployment caused by the introduction of chip technology. Are the individuals d-isplaced by the automation of industrial processes to be put on the dole or is the extra wealth created going ｷto be used to create new jobs in socially desirable activities : health, welfare and education? Vast industries have been set up in America, Japan and West Germany to manufacture silicon chips. 'Britain, late into this particular field, will find it difficult to compete in this production ; her contr-ibution is probably better concentrated on the development of " software " to control the chips and to devise new uses for them. 4. change and its origins With the computer, we are not at a stage of clear solutions or easy prescriptions. Rather we are in an age of strategy, not tactics. Unfortunately western society is losing its faith in science and is no longer looking to the products of technology to advance it 付owards the good life but rather for alternatives to growth. A new development in electronic computing is treated by the public with boredom. But the computer has now reached a stage when it is capable of realisingits potential. It has the power and the experience to transform sooiety. It would be a grave error for intellectuals to look with disdain at its activities or stand aloof from its encroachments. When Charles Babbage, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at CambridgeUniversity, announced his grand design for the Analytical Engine (in conception a computer) he seized the imagination of the intellectuals of the day. Lady Lovelace (Lord Byron's daughter) sold her jewels to help his work. The Government poured money into a project which was doomed to failure. What Babbage tried to do was not possible with the technology which was at his disposal. The parts of his machine that he succeeded in building are displayed today in the computing galleries at the Science Museum, relics of a more optimistic age. Today the computer scientist works in his own closed society insulated from the rest of the community. The computerpioneers of today have at their disposal the necessary technology ; they are advancing into a new world. How brave this new world will be will depend on how responsible the new powers of control are harnessed, control of data, control of the economy and control of society. The current efforts of socialists to change society could be completelyoverwhelmed by developments brought about by these technological forces. The barrier between the computer and society must be broken down if there is to be a move towards a more just society. A partnership must be forged between computer technologists and the leaders of society to harness together the machine in the service of man. Computing is too serｷious a business to be 浜eft to computer scientists. Therefore society and its political leaders need to be educated on the potential power of the computer and its increasing ability to handle complextasks, the social implications of the computer take-over of management functions, the threat of uncontrolled computerdevelopments to a free society, the benefits the computer could brｷing if it were used to open out society rather than to close it in and the controls that are needed 付o be built into a democratic society to defend minorities and individuals against the computer. the roots of change The computer must not be looked at complacently as yet another artifact to aid the organisations of civilised man. It is now aiding the collection and retrieval of data for large organisations and when it does this successfully it can bringpositive benefits. What could be more benign than a machine which takes ｷthe chore out of lfilｷing and retrieving .the information needed to run an organisation ? It would be fine if our use of the computer were to end there but it is not going to. It is increasingly to be used in the manipulation and control of data. The computercould end by running the organisation. As the major impact of computers will be sociological, how can the rational scientific tradition of socialism help us to digest ｷthe technical advances made by computers within the fabric of our society and guide us in the development of a strategy ? What rational framework can we use to monitor the progress of the computer to harmonise its inevitable social impact with what we would con 'sider civilised political ideals ? The control and direction of this sociological bomb must be central to our political concern, as is already the case with economics. In his book One Dimensional Man which was first published in 1966 Marcuse wrote of his concern that man is now subject to a new tyrany preventing him realisinghis full human potential. His enemy is technology. He writes that "its sweepingrationality which propels efficiency and growth is itsel'f irrational". 'He warns against " using the scientific conquest of nMure for the ｷscientific conquest of man". "Technological rationality", he claims, "has become a political reality". Mesmerised by the struggle between capitalism and communism, Marcuse sees technology as but a tool in this struggle. He fails to see that technology itself is the threat. The worker in a large modern car plant is much mare the product of that technology than of three thousand years of civiHsation with its roots in Greece and Rome. 稗ut the dangers are real: the tyranny of technology controlled by a complex network of comｷ puter processes which destroys man as a decision making animal. There is something inherently undemocratic in the way a computer system is designed today. 'It is a confidential process carried out to meet the needs of management. 'It is not subject to anyoutside control. The only criterｷion asked of a computer system is "does it work?" Large changes are taking place in our society without the benefit of publicdebate. Do the " experts" know best? Their only qualification is a detailed knowledge of the technology they handle. They may be completely insensitive to its social impact. A systems analyist, the technologist who designs computer systems, normallyworks for a client-his .boss. He is subject to conventional professional middle class confidentiality. The resulting design is written in a recondite language which often precludes 'further participation by the client. Alternative designs are verysddom considered and evaluated. It is usually just a case of finding a method which works and then selling it to the managers. Yet there is an approach available to a democratic socialist that addresses itself to this problem. Politicians of the social democratic left have seized on Karl Popper as giving them a theoretical basis on which to work and it is customary for politicians of the centre left to claim to have been influenced by him. The most accessible of his political works is The Open Society and its Enemies which he wrote while a ｷrefugee in wartime New Zealand and which he regarded as his war effort. In his masterpiece The Logic of Scientific Discovery {'1950) he developed an understanding of how a scientific hypothesis is formulated and then attacked, thus to be refined or rejected. In this, Popperclaims to have solved the problem of induction. The idea of "falsifiability", that the way to progress in science is to attempt to refute an established principle, he carries on in his other works. He is against "Utopian social engineering", final solutions which are imposed in the conv-iction that they are right for society, whether these systems come from Plato, Marx or Hitler. Yet "Utopian social engineering" is the very nature of most computer systems design. What he is for is " piecemeal social engineering " where a political theory or social advance which is consciously applied to a part of a system is regll!rded .in the same way as a scientific hypothesis as being in need of attack. It can then be held to be of provisional use until it is falsified. For him the success of western civilisation is its open nature-openess to debate, openess to ideas. This lack of " order " in the west, where different ideas are allowed to fail or succeed and where opposition and debate are part of our political scene, provides a setting for the testing of social hypothesis and allows for an orderly political evolution. For a Popperian view of society to prevail, a social advance must be presented as a hypothesis. It may be held only as long as it has not been falsified. This process can only take place in an opensociety where debate is encouraged and the results of successful experiment (thatis, one which falsifies the current hypothesis) are acted upon. Open debate together with the strong belief that the theories of the expert must be tested is the essence of Popperianism. There are many ways in which the growth of technology and the build up of large conglomerations (both public and private) lead to difficulties in maintaining an open society. There are three particular ways in which the establishment of a large computerised system for an organisation of the state-a data bank society-can make an open society unrealisable: first, administration is left to the experts and trained systems analysts, second, computer systems are tested to see if they work without errors, fulfilling the objectives defined at each design stage, but the process of design cannot be perfect and the final system is never tested to see if it faｷils because the original objectives or the perception of the problem have been deficient, and third, such systems are so complex after once having been established they are very resistent to change and modification. In our western society, much of man's freedom in day-to-day activities is based on the ｷinefficiency of the controls exerted upon him rather than the tolerence of -the people exercising those controls. His dossier is sketchy, its pages hard to examine. 'Bureaucracy chases the butterfly freedom with a tattered net. Computerisation will provide a bigger and finer meshed net for the man in charge. For society to remain open, every proposed advance must be subject to attack in the Popper-ian sense. The ways to achieve this will be discussed later. Bydefault we could easily become a society where things are done for our good for reasons which we do not understand. We could be well off materially and carefully organised into non-conflictinggroups. But we will have lost our spirit. We will have become a conformingsociety. professionalism A previous chapter discussed the way in which computer specialists design systems. There are two points which arise which concern the work of the profe ional. The Popperian thesis of an open society needing open debate is not only a philosophical basis for social democracy, it is also a very sound method of design. An open society is not just nice because there is free debate, it is also. more successful. 'Systems analyists, to designsuccessful systems, must find means of breaking through the tradition of professional confidence and of involving all those affected in its design. There will be a reluctance to do ｷthis because it is a messy process. It is tidier and less demanding to be the bureaucrat and work in private. However a better design is achieved as a result of debate. The pro- fessｷion should be responsible for developing a methodology that stimulates debate, a methodology where the computer professionals cease regarding a design that works as compl-ete. Not only should the design be challenged but also its objectives. A second point is the extent to which we are dependent on the professional in the technical ｷtask of manipulating data. To protect us and the profession, we need the equivalent of the Hipocraticoath. This would mean that, whoever the programer or anaｷlyst is workingfor, he has, together with a responsibility to his client, a higher responsibility to a code of ethics. The reasonable use of data may in the end be a matter of judgment, the professional should in anycircumstances have the .firm guidance of a professional code of ethics, such as for example, that proposed by the British Computer \Society. 5. current and future policies Most of the political and legislative activity that has taken place has not considered the broader issue of the impact of computers on society but has focussed on the specific issue of privacy and the storage of and access to personal data files. There has always been, if not fear, then distinct unease in the attitude of laymen 'towards the computer. The modest performance of the computer ｷin the earlier years made such fears groundless. More recently as data storage and manipulation has been become more ｷeffective, this fear has arisen again and centred around the issue of privacy. There are specificexamples of where computer stored data has been used as a basis of credit control. It has also been used by the us army to store information on politicaldissidents. These specific ｷexamples have caused the public to realise the awful potential of computers as manipulatorsof personal data. There is a strongpolitical feeling that this process should be subject to control. With the constrictions of the UK Official Secrets Act, it would be reasonable to wonder uneasily whether similar developments have taken place here in Britain. use and abuse Recently The Police Review {21 April1978) reported a Home Office sponsored experiment to index, collate and store all the information gathered by each collator throughout one large prov.jncial force. Much of this information is valid criminal data. A substantial proportionis unchecked bunkum. Proud of their project, the Home Office invited two Americans to see it in action. These two Americans were horrified. " Such a system", they said, "would be totallyunacceptable in the USA". The need for an ｷindividual to be protected against the misuse of data about himself held on a data bank has been ｷrecognised for some time and a committee was set up under the chairmanshipof Sir Kenneth Younger to enquire into the whole problem of privacy in Britain {Report of the Commission of Privacy, Cmd 5012, HMSO, 1972). At tha