首页> 外文会议>IFIP World Computer Congress >From CoCom to Dot-Com: Technological Determinisms in Computing Blockades, 1949 to 1994
【24h】

From CoCom to Dot-Com: Technological Determinisms in Computing Blockades, 1949 to 1994

机译:从CoCom到Dot-Com:计算封锁技术确定主义,1949年至1994年

获取原文

摘要

The well-known restrictions on exports of computing equipment to the USSR and its allies at the end of the cold war had a curious history. Although the legacy of CoCom is that it seems natural to restrict technology from potential belligerents, it is difficult to determine the policy's efficacy. Started as a corollary to the plan to rebuild Europe after World War II, CoCom originally had nothing to do with computers. High-profile failures brought the usefulness of the economic blockade into question at the same time a new academic definition of technology became popular: technology is not just a material device, but it is also a means of getting something done. Computers were at the center of the quandary: does a device provide an inevitable strategic advantage, or is it the innovation culture that surrounds the device what needs protection? What is more, protecting the institutionalized knowledge from antagonists would require reducing the openness of the academic and scientific institutions that had provided innovation in the first place. When the personal computing revolution was underway, the computing embargo was at the forefront of CoCom, even though PCs had not been prominent at its inception. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the USSR, it might seem as if CoCom had been successful, yet contemporary critics and practitioners think otherwise. The determinism that underwrote CoCom then operated in reverse: policies granting access to computing networks were imagined to inevitably bring about cultural and political changes. The failure of CoCom to achieve a meaningful hindrance to technology and the unintended consequences of its implementation failed to make an impact in the political arena, but the lessons about technology transfer grained from the evaluation of the embargo deserve greater attention to guide policy today.
机译:在冷战结束时对苏联的计算设备出口和其盟友出口的众所周知的限制具有好奇的历史。虽然科科莫的遗产是,从潜在的交战者限制技术似乎很自然,但很难确定政策的疗效。在第二次世界大战后开始重建欧洲的计划的必然结果,CoCom最初与计算机无关。高调的失败使经济封锁的有用性同时具有新的学术定义,技术变得流行:技术不仅仅是一种材料设备,而且它也是一种完成某些事情的方法。电脑位于码头的中心:设备是否提供了不可避免的战略优势,或者是围绕器件的创新文化需要保护的内容?更多的是,保护来自敌人的制度化知识需要减少第一次提供创新的学术和科学机构的开放性。当个人计算革命正在进行中,计算禁运处于CoCom的最前沿,尽管PC在其成立时没有突出。随着柏林墙的堕落以及苏联的解散,似乎是Cocom成功,但当代批评者和从业者别的思考。向CoCom提供的决定论逆转:授予对计算网络的访问的政策是不可避免地带来文化和政治变革。科科莫对技术的有意义的障碍和实施的意外后果未能对政治竞技场产生有意义的影响,但是从评估禁运的技术转移的经验教训值得加强关注今天的指导政策。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号