Conference 7.286::digital

    Sounds like a grand idea!
    
    $ Notes
    Notes> open world
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    			Welcome to the World Notes Conf.
        Please read notes 1.* before proceeding and be thoughtful about
              anything you post here. Remember -- UPI is watching!
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Now for a question? With so many leaders in the same notes conf., Who's
    going to be the moderator? Not a job I would want!
    
    
    MacaRoon
    

Diplomacy doesn't work this way, and I'm not sure it should.

Flames could literally erupt into flames.

I often really worry when I watch Peter Jennings moderating discussions between
the U.S. Congress and Supreme Soviet.  It seems he sometimes tries to fan
flames.  Nothing like a crisis to increase your share during a ratings period.

/john

    REF:     <<< Note 1115.2 by COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" >>>
                           -< An extremely BAD idea >-

    >><<Diplomacy doesn't work this way, and I'm not sure it should.>>
    
    Maybe it's time that world leadership take responsibility and eradicate
    professional "diplomatic" bureaucrat managers out of the picture, with
    world leaders talking directly with one another.
    
    Further, I would argue that problems arise from misunderstandings due
    to LACK OF COMMUNICATION.
    
    Digital e-mail and VAXnotes would certainly be a solution in improving
    what little, direct, QUICK communication that takes place now among
    those who lead the countries of this world.
    
    Regarding moderators, unlike the perceived need by some for Digital
    VAXnotes moderators to censor our exchange of ideas and opinions, in
    this particular usage, there would be no need for censorship, and thus
    no need for any moderators.  Censorship and Digital's information
    technology are NOT conducive to working very well together.
    

	No thank you.

	Think of all the misunderstandings that arise in notesfiles due to
slight misinterpretations and nuances of thought that aren't captured exactly
in words.  The interactiveness of Notes, sad to say, encourages people to reply
quickly without taking the time to carefully select their words.  For our
notesfiles, this just results in an occasional, and inevitable, misunderstanding
and isn't a major deal.  It wouldn't be the same for international relations.
I suspect that such a notesfile would not gather spontanious thoughts, but
rather would serve as a depository for speechs prepared and reviewed by the
usual committee of diplomats.  (And no, I don't think we can just wave a magic
wand and make the diplomats all disappear.)

	But, in a lighter note, if it were created, I'd vote for having Ted
Koppel as the moderator.  He is the only person I've ever seen that can tell
a country's King or President to shut up and answer the question without
sounding insulting.

								-craig

p.s.  By the way, would our export control even permit sending a workstation
to every nation on the Earth?

>p.s.  By the way, would our export control even permit sending a workstation
>to every nation on the Earth?

No.  Although we can now send limited memory MicroVAX systems to Eastern Europe,
I think networks are still restricted technology.

/john

And who will ensure the security of such such a network? Who will ensure
the identity of each user is, in fact, the real person and not an
imposter (person or node)? What kind of publicty would DEC get if
hostilty would arise as a result of this?

The idea in .0 is very poor indeed.

Lee

    
    I suppose bad publicity would be the last thing on the minds of
    anyone left to sift through the ashes. Otherwise, good point.
    
    
    "Please take my word, Mr. Gorbachev, that our forces are not on war
    status. You must be getting bad information, there's nothing to
    worr%*>..
    
    SHAZBOT, the network's down again!
    

    
    While there are problems and missing pieces, as was indicated to me by
    another employee, it IS vital to world development that there be open
    communications among all world leaders, ultimately leading to dialogue
    on the same wavelength.  Digital's network information technology is
    the solution.
    
    If we implement first, we lead the world.
    
    If IBM does this first, or Fujitsu (or Japan Inc.) then where will that
    leave Digital 10 to 50 years out?
    
    There's a cliche in marketing practice that says whoever ENTERS a
    market first, capturing the market share, usually ends up OWNING it for
    a very long time -- look at how IBM, active since punch cards in the
    20's continues to dominate computers, setting the standard, even when
    their standards are less than stellar and a disadvantage to customers
    and users.  Univac had better technology and so do we but IBM crunched
    Univac and IBM still owns the "high ground" generating 60 billion in
    revenues and 5 billion in net profit, which is a lot of cash to do
    "stuff" with, while our net margins have been steadily declining into
    the cellar -- basement to some of you ;-}
    
    I submit Digital should say, "Despite lots of problems and U.S. trade
    restrictions, and how it will be used, we'll worry about all this
    later; the concept of "OFFERING FIRST" is sound -- let's initiate based
    on intuition and see where it develops, working out details and
    problems as they develop!"  A let's go put a man on the moon vision,
    when most laughed at the concept, treating it negatively.
    
    Sooner or later, someone IS going to do it -- it is in Digital's
    interests, and our interests as employees, to ensure our prosperity
    (and jobs) via being more bold and innovative, not only in creating the
    technology and software, but in HOW it can be used, either in offering
    value-added information services, or in value-added information
    exchange in ways not explored yet, such as linking the leaders of the
    world.
    

Actually, I like the idea.

Let's look at this practically for a minute.  First off, I don't see Bush,
Gorbachev, or other superpower leaders addicted to notes and typing away
for endless hours a day.  These guys have *REAL WORK* to do! ;-)

But, that does not mean that notes can be used for an open forum to express
the interests and goals of a government, society or institution.  I do not
believe that notes would be used for ad hoc debates and off-the-cuff
remarks of global leaders for the same reasons expressed by earlier
replies:  No one wants to see their political career go down as a result of
intellectual flaming.

For those who worry about our leaders communicating clearly and precisely,
I would recommend reading the editorial page of your local newspaper.
Politicians have always shown that they can express themselves in the
written word.  For them, it is a requirement for survival in their
profession.

In the same way that every speech and comment is prepared, reviewed and
adjusted for spin control before it is released, the same would be true for
entries in a global notes file.  Chances are that a Spokes/Notes person
would be assigned within an administration.  This is similar to assigning a
project member to monitor/moderate a project's Notes file.

I would expect that this network would run completely in the public domain
so that anyone could read (but not write) the conferences.  Global media
communications have shown that intellectual discussions between people from
different societies do have merit.  The experience of Digital's corporate
network, and the employees experiences with mail and notes, have shown that
computer networks have unique capabilities for expressing ideas, concepts
and issues between people regardless of distance.  This is a very powerful
form of communication.


Personally, I would have done a little more research into the idea before
presenting it to KO.  The proposal has merit, but it completely ignores
many questions, some of them already raised:

* Which countries do we already have a sales force present?

* Which countries would get a workstation that we don't/can't sell?
Could this be considered a way to open the market for our products, or is
it one special case?  How would trade restrictions effect this proposal?

* Who is going to run the network?  Digital?  The phone companies?  The
U.N.?  How are governments with "backwards" telecommunication
infrastructures going to communicate with the rest of the world?  Satellite
dishes?  Telecommunication rewiring?  The workstations is only the tip
of the iceberg.  Who is going to pay for the network?

* What do you do if a government says "thank you, but no."  Or more likely,
uses the workstation for something else.  What if a government doesn't
"write" into conferences.  Do you take the workstation back?


I think the idea has merit, but you need to go back and do some research.
The idea seems more like a whim instead of a solid proposal (personal
opinion).  If you propose that Digital gives these workstations away, then
"He who proposes does."  It is your responsibility to address the problems
and issues which can occur in implementing such a project.  I think you
raised this proposal too fast and too high.  That's how good ideas (and
their developers) burn out.  Be forewarned.

Dave

What does this topic have to do with "the way we work at Digital?"

    REF: <<< Note 1115.11 by NOTIME::SACKS >>> 
    
    >><<What does this topic have to do with "the way we work at
    Digital?">>
    
    The way we work at Digital includes how we, all of us employees in a
    single family, lead ourselves and our enterprise into the future.  An
    employee being just an individual contributor does not abdicate one's
    responsibility to be involved in discussion regarding our collective
    future just because one does not have "manager" or "vice president"
    after one's name.
    
    While the base topic deals with a specific idea (which was not a
    detailed proposal nor was a detailed proposal required just to submit
    an idea in this corporation, contrary to any popular opinion), the
    discussion of the idea is pertinent to this conference as the DIGITAL
    forum is the place to discuss how we, as so-called empowered employees,
    will create and discuss actions affecting both leadership upward and
    actions affecting our jobs and prosperity, and position in the world at
    large.  And this idea does affect such a broad action of leadership on
    Digital's part within the rapidly shrinking global village, a big
    picture community project, of no less importance than other noteworthy
    community topics already listed within this conference.
    

    This is not a flame, it is a statement of fact about my opinion. I am
    very disappointed with what appears to me as a naive level of
    understanding of the potential of communication for solving "big"
    problems. 
    
    Communication is such a pretty word.  Its a shame it doesn't
    communicate much.  It requires a sender, a receiver, and a linking
    channel for a two person network.  Sender and Receiver need to share a
    language relevant to the topic of the conversation.  The channel needs
    a high signal to noise ratio.  Deceit and malicious misinterpretation
    defeat the purpose.  Lots of problems, psychological, social, and
    technical... and that's for just two people.  
    
    After 31 years of marriage, my wife and I still have problems
    communicating about some things.  I have never felt comfortable that I
    could communicate effectively to a classroom of thirty students about
    subjects that were almost entirely technical or matters of fact.  I
    despair of communicating electronically to people I don't know
    face-to-face. And when you add in the real conflicts between the goals
    of different people, the suggestion that problems are just "LACK OF
    COMMUNICATION" seems outrageous.   
    
    You might ask, if you feel that way, why respond?  Well I am a teacher.
    I cannot feel comfortable without correcting what I consider are
    significant errors of logic or judgement.  I have little faith that
    I will convince anyone, but I have to make the effort for my own
    conscience's sake.

    Regards,
    
    Dick

    REF: <<< Note 1115.13 by MOCA::BELDIN "Dick Beldin" >>>.  
    
    >><<I despair of communicating electronically to people I don't know
    face-to-face. And when you add in the real conflicts between the goals
    of different people>>
    
    Yet, communicating electronically with LARGE amounts of people, all
    with different goals, is exactly the backbone of the technology of this
    company.
    
    The system is the network.  But the REAL value lies not in number
    crunching and mailing number reports about via VMS Mail but rather in
    the value of qualitative interactive exchange of ideas and information
    upon which all those in the network, as in this case Digital, can then
    act on in order to develop and build a more successful enterprise.
    
    Ken Olsen cannot meet with all 125,000 employees yet must communicate
    the goals and values and policies to all -- our network does it FASTER
    than any alternative in a similarly sized corporation.  Likewise, a
    given employee who creates an action idea in the field that leads to
    more successfully winning customer decision-makers to go with Digital
    and stay with Digital cannot meet with all 12,000 sales reps, 26,000
    customer services people, 5,000 software support specialists, not to
    mention thousands in other capacities.  And the company cannot afford
    to wait 5 years for that information -- a given idea that worked -- to
    make its way via paper and word of mouth.  E-mail and VAXnotes offers
    the opportunity for the fast exchange of that idea.
    
    Interactive, near real-time communication via electronics is the
    future, just as we discuss NOW, here, how this affects us as employees
    and how we work, with a Digital employee in Japan, and another in
    Italy, reading your words and mine and others, moments after we press
    CTRL Z.
    
    Sure, real face-to-face is superior, and Digital's network will not
    replace face-to-face communications.  But electronic communications,
    especially with record keeping like in VAXnotes, is a means of
    augmenting and complementing, and does fulfill the problem in attaining
    interactive comunications will large amounts of people scattered
    geographically.
    
    And in the case of networking the leaders of the world, perhaps the
    means of initiating MORE face-to-face world summit meetings (like how
    many have been held, those with the REAL power, the presidents, where
    ALL have met -- all presidents from each of the world's 157 countries
    -- in the last 45 years -- one meeting?  None ever?  Does being naive
    allow one to argue that current communication methodology and practices
    have not exactly had a stellar record of success?)
    
    Regardless of all problems to be worked out, Digital should lead by
    offering first (perhaps offering the network and workstations on a
    lease basis to the U.N. with Digital owning and operating -- that
    solves the money problem).
    

    
    How about running a pilot program in Massachussets? - The potential
    for conflict and misunderstanding in this lovely Commonwealth seems
    to be so great, that I'm sure we would find out what bugs/problems
    there may be in the network.  Maybe even install a citizen access
    terminal in each of the 351 city or town halls!    
    
    Re. .13, Yes, Communication is very difficult, but that doesn't
    mean we shouldn't say anything (as your conscience seems to tell
    you!)  (8- ).  It's actually been my experience that problems don't
    get to be so "big" if communication is open!     
    
    -Lynn
                 
    
    If I'm naive!
      
    
     

>And who will ensure the security of such such a network? Who will ensure
>the identity of each user is, in fact, the real person and not an
>imposter (person or node)?

Well, that's my job (w.r.t. VMS) but I have several years of work to do
before everyone can stick their personal smart card into a workstation
to sign messages with an unforgeable and verifiable electronic signature.

But that's the least of the problems with this cockamamie proposal.  The
kind of hooliganism that could result from tabling issues that don't fit
any recognized international framework will lead to misunderstandings of
the utmost gravity.  We already know that VAX Notes is a lousy mechanism
for coming to a clear resolution of any issue, as the beginning of this
paragraph deliberately demonstrates.

The leaders of the world _are_ already electronically connected by commercial
electronic mail and other record data networks.  This allows private messages
to be sent instantly from any capital to any other.  VAX Notes is simply not
the right medium for discussions among political leaders.

/john

    REF: <<< Note 1115.16 by COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" >>>
    
    >><<everyone can stick their personal smart card into a workstation
    to sign messages with an unforgeable and verifiable electronic
    signature.>>
    
    Perfect solution to that problem.
    
    >><<VAX Notes is simply not the right medium for discussions among
    political leaders.>>
    
    Why can't we allow our "customers" to decide which Digital tools they
    will or will not use, and the appropriateness of what they will or will
    not say in the medium?
    
    You reinforce the perception among so many managers in this company
    that VAXnotes -- nay even electronic mail by some! -- cannot be an
    effective tool for discussion of diverse ideas and the fine-tuning of
    those ideas.
    
    The use of VAXnotes as an effective tool is contingent upon educated
    involvement, usage and leadership of those with the power to affect
    change and those involved with implementation who influence change. 
    Many of us know that there are very effective "group" VAXnotes
    conferences, most notably in engineering and software development.  As
    those are effective, so too could there be equally effective
    conferences dealing with management or change within any group in
    Digital, any level, and within such levels within all our customers,
    including government, and even ultimately, the linkage between the
    governments of all countries.
    
    I felt strongly enough about this to stand up and send it to Ken Olsen
    and Jack Smith AND to post it here and in MARKETING for open
    discussion.  If you feel so strongly from a negative standpoint, please
    send your words similarly to Ken and Jack warning them about the perils
    and post a copy of that memo here.
    

>                    <<< Note 1115.15 by USEM::MARCELLINO >>>
>                          -< an opinion, not a flame >-
>
>    
>    How about running a pilot program in Massachussets? - The potential


There is already a defacto example of this in the STP::MASSACHUSETTS
conference.  Folks there are wont to vent their extremist views, pushing
each other to more inflammatory rhetoric.

In general, NOTES seems to encourage radical and harsh statements.  IMHO
the medium encourages such behavior because it shelters face to face
discussions.  It becomes too easy to flame when the interaction is reduced
from face to face, past voice to voice, down to note to note.  

As a business tool, for distributed projects, NOTES is a fine product.  As
a means for improving communications on the human level -- well, the network is
replete with conferences full of invective.

/dan

>    I felt strongly enough about this to stand up and send it to Ken Olsen
>    and Jack Smith AND to post it here and in MARKETING for open
>    discussion.  If you feel so strongly from a negative standpoint, please
>    send your words similarly to Ken and Jack warning them about the perils
>    and post a copy of that memo here.

Ahah!  Escalation!

   Leader of Country A to Leader of Country B

	"I felt so strongly about the need to supply Free Lithuania
	 with oil that I've sent twenty supertankers to Klaipeda.  I've
	 also arranged to connect them to this network.  If you feel
	 so strongly from a negative standpoint, please send your navy
	 to prevent the arrival of the oil, and please arrange electronic
	 interference measures to prevent their network participation."

/john

    It's at times like these that I sorely wish that I could go into a
    notes conference and say:
    
    SET NOTE 1115.*/SEEN_AND_NEVER_WANT_TO_SEE_AGAIN
    
    in that way I wouldn't have to step over this drivel.
    
    Dave

In all of history I can't think of any vendor of anything that has made
an impression as a result of their eagerness to involve themselves in the
fasion suggested in .0. (If you can name one, go ahead). The company that
accomplishes .0 is somehow going to be "king of the hill"? Absurd.

This 'global village' baloney fools noone; it is easily recognized for
what it is: 'New Age' idealogy.

DEC should stick to making the best systems/networks/software and leave
the politics out of it.

Lee

Re: .21

I've heard that Apple Computer gives away a few dozen Macintoshes every
year to people they feel "deserve" a machine.


>   This 'global village' baloney fools noone; it is easily recognized for
>   what it is: 'New Age' idealogy.

I guess you missed the March, 1990 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN article called "The
Road to the Global Village" (pages 83-94).

Or do you consider Scientific American one of those radical new age
publications?  ;-)

    re .0
    
    What do you plan to do about language barriers?  Or is your global
    SOAPBOX really going to be another Tower of Babel?

    re -1. Vi kan alltid snacka norska.


    For once I must agree with 0., all the problems in the world 
    are simply due to lack of communication. Gorba simply can't find a way 
    to exchange ideas with George, one can see frustration in his face all
    the time. 

    But, to start with, why not have VAX notes in dark corners of say, New
    York City. Clearly, there are many confused citizens that mug others 
    because of lack of means of expression. If you can convince Jack the 
    Ripper that he is a bad boy and should behave , the experiment could 
    be extended to say, Khadaffi or Gorby.

	Re: .24 (and all the other replies lamenting the lack of communication)

>  For once I must agree with 0., all the problems in the world
>  are simply due to lack of communication. Gorba simply can't find a way
>  to exchange ideas with George, one can see frustration on his face all
>  the time.

	Being flip for a second, I'd suggest that Gorbachev's frusteration has
to do moreso with the Baltic States and the Soviet economy than in him not
having a DECNET link to Bush.  Getting serious and back to the topic, however...

	Lack of communication.  Bunk.  Name me all the countries in the world
whose leaders don't have access to telephones or telexes.  How many countries
are *not* represented in other areas by their embassies?  Sheeze, the US even
had backdoor discussions with the PLO via their embassies in Tunisia a couple
of years ago, right?  Would _that_ communication be enhanced by a world-readable
notesfile?  Nah, the politics would have never let it occur. Global discussions?
The UN is very good at letting the countries of the world get together and voice
their positions.

	The leaders of every nation already have the *technology* to communicate
with any other leader in the world.  There are other problems that interfere
with the communication process -- politics, language barriers, bureaucracy,
etc. -- but the technology is already in place today.  NOTES is only another
technology.  It would *not* magically remove all the other problems and create
a wonderful world for us all to live in.  Life is not this simple.

								-craig

    It's naive to think that the problem is lack of communication.
    Problems are usually opposed interests:
    
    Country A: Region X is ours--get out!
    Country B: No way--region X is ours!
    
    And similiarly for access to materials, inport and export laws,
    relations to third parties.  It's not that Gorby doesn't know
    what George said, it's that we want things to happen to them
    which they don't want to happen, and vice versa.
    
    Networks don't help resolve issues of that sort.
    
    			-John Bishop

Digital has VAXnotes and DECnet (the Easynet) galore, and we still can't
seem to accomplish the lofty goal of good communication. If DEC the
high-tech wizard can't accomplish it, how can world leaders be expected to
do the same?

In either situation, people are the problem, not the lack of technology.

I've yet to see good technology defeat a manager's ego.

Lee

    I believe there is an arguement to support the Information Age and that
    is to allow free communication among the knowledge workers. I strongly
    believe that the Industrial age and old line politics restricted
    communication up through the hierarchical paths and in most cases
    stifled communications among the people. Open up the paths between the
    people of all countries and we will soon realize that the differences
    are relatively small and only accentuated and contrived by socalled
    leaders that cater to the ignorance and prejudice that they generate by
    restricting communications. 
    
    So in essence I do not support a high level communication net for the
    leaders of the country, but an open communications net for any and all
    people. Maybe the International Executives Forum on Prodigy is a good
    start that brings the communications down to the business leaders level
    and not the political leaders level. Let's face it we have had enough
    nationalism to last us for the balance of our history.

    I read an item a couple of days ago in the Colorado Springs Gazette
    Telegraph.  It concerned the invention of telegraph and the laying of
    the first trans-Atlantic cable in 1844 or so.  Many people believed a
    new age of peace and prosperity would result as a direct consequence of
    increased communication and understanding among the peoples of the
    world.