If you haven't heard (and I doubt you haven't, considering the fervency of the average Kossack in news absorption and discussion), there's a push for making our Presidential candidates discuss science and our technological future in a national debate. Not just the Democrats, we hope-- but the Republicans as well (so we can watch them tap-dance over evolution or be left to be framed as the "anti-technology, anti-future" party for skipping the debate).
But the list of points to argue about, "Climate change, Pandemics, Scientific innovation, etc" seems a bit lacking to me. I think the list needs some expansion- less talk about "science" and more about "infrastructure." Less "Space" and more "Cyberspace."
Of all the Candidates, I can only think of one who has a plank in his platform on technology-- Barrack Obama's innovation plan includes the creation of a "Technology Czar" which would no doubt help cover emergent technologies and be able to form coherent future policy, which would leave the "Net Neutrality" debate in the dustbin where it belongs (there should be no debate-- leave the net alone); it includes a call for more broadband infrastructure, which this country is in dire need of; and, interestingly enough, the "progessive" ideal of having clean and open government through technologically-aided public meeting (webcams, open-sourcing, direct communications etc).
I think Mr. Obama is on the right track-- which is why, when I see the Science Debate list, I'm disappointed that there isn't "Broadband infrastructure overhaul" listed. We're the richest country on the planet but we're falling behind in an area that will, without a doubt, push all future economies.
I'd also like a discussion of our slaved-system regarding Cell phones. Cell phones are, in fact, tools- like PCs. So why is it that we've allowed a monopoly on the software and contractual obligations involved in purchasing cell phones? (This problem may be fixed in the coming months but nothing is ever a lock-- why have we been in this situation in the first place? I think the future President should be discussing how they'd treat non-existent technologies, that there's an underlying rationale to how they'd treat such things-- pro market, pro corporate or pro consumer?).
I'd like a discussion on their ideas about virtual property rights, about RIAA lawsuits, about copyrights and downloading and a thousand other bleeding-edge legal issues that a modern President's bureaucracy should have some grasp of-- because the times are moving faster by the day.
I'd like a discussion on what kind of Supreme Court Justice they'd nominate, given that the future of legal issues will revolve around the internet and its impact on society.
I'd like a discussion about how they plan to encourage innovation, what tax plans they have for internet sales, how they feel about virtual environments. I'd like a discussion on what they believe about the fragmentation of society, vis a vis the internet.
I understand we should be talking about the War.
We should be talking about the soul of our nation and wresting it back from the Repug torturers who currently grip it.
But technology is going to be the fuel that runs our economy out of the coming recession-- not oil, not manufacture. That is where our jobs will come from, that is where money will be made-- sometimes, with no actual product being made at all.
I want to know how far into the future my Next President is able to look.