In the New York Times Magazine’s annual look at the year in ideas was this bit of business about adding sound to silence:

“Nothing seemed to herald the end of the internal combustion engine more than the ability of hybrid cars to leap suddenly to life without the slightest sound. Unfortunately, it turns out that the sweet silence of 21st-century technology has a serious downside: pedestrians and bicyclists are less likely to hear hybrids and electric cars coming their way and are more likely to be clipped or run over. That has prompted a back-to-the-future solution: fake car noise that will alert the unwary.”

This is the latest in a long line of retrofits for safety.  The most important and well-smelled may be the addition of that bad egg smell to natural gas which is odorless.  This was prompted more than 70 years ago when a Texas high school was destroyed by a build-up of natural gas that no one noticed.  300 people died and a law was passed making the retrofit mandatory.

Not all such safety moves are well-received by those the rules seek to protect.  In 2007, USA Track and Field, the governing body for long-distance running events, decided headphones or ear buds should not be used during races.  The runners objected but the motivation was not dissimilar to dealing with the dangers of silent cars and odorless gas.  We have a better chance to avoid danger when it announces its presence.

The problem, as we are discovering, is that we are moving from spending most of our time in the real world to investing more and more in the online world where danger — whether identity theft, malware, sniffer programs and the rest — doesn’t make much of a sound.  And the rules we rely on out there — speed limits and stop signs for cars, building codes for gas lines and a courteous “on your left” while running — don’t apply in here.

It brings to mind “Marathon Man,” a 1976 film with Dustin Hoffman who falls prey to Laurence Olivier.  In a scene set in a dentist’s chair, Olivier wants to know, “Is it safe?”

How can you know if you cannot hear it or smell it or feel it?

Share

In a column by Rob Preston, vice president and editor-in-chief of Information Week, he laments a coming wave of regulation affecting the information technology industry.  In his August 17 “down to Business” column, Preston argues that such a move by Congress will only “toss more goo into this economic engine of growth.”

While it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness, sometimes cursing the darkness is satisfying, so why not do both?  I tried to do just that in a letter to Preston.  My point is that understanding the way Congress works, standing on the sidelines (where most technology companies have stood) opens the door to unnecessary regulation.

Here is (most of) the text of my note:

You properly forecast an increase in technology regulation but improperly weight responsibility and ignore the nature of Congressional oversight.  As someone who spent 15 years working in Washington, D.C. and nearly that much time since in San Francisco, I can assure you that regulation is Congress’ response to upcoming elections and the cash needed to underwrite them.

The history of technology companies’ reticence to engage in politics gives them little leverage when Members of Congress see the chance to earn support by “standing up” for constituents and interest groups concerned about what might happen when their world goes digital.

I have seen this play out for years in the privacy arena.  The FTC’s “red flags” are only the most recent example of new regulation aimed at the threat of identity theft.  It is getting close to the kinds of warning labels placed on lawn mowers prohibiting consumers from lifting them for use as hedge trimmers.

But before anyone gets too smug about the “illiterati” who cause laws, rules and regulation to get in the way of the future, note that the technology industry has done little to give Congress a chance to see things differently.  Every industry ought to be subject to appropriate regulation.  The rule of law replaced dueling many years ago.  That’s why we have lawyers.  Whether we have the right number of them is a question for others.

But it falls to the technology industry, individually and collectively, to make its case now that the indictment has been handed down.  As any lawyer will tell you, when the defendant does not appear, the court has no recourse.

Share