Martin Banks, Personal Computer World 03/89 - checked

March 1989

For a smallish, and not terribly significant island with an ego problem, the UK can sometimes make a great deal of noise. Occasionally, that noise is of the 'BANG' variety, which is hardly surprising. A recent report prepared by Dr Jeremy Bray, the Labour Party's spokesperson on things scientific and technological, pointed to the reason. As a nation, we spend considerably more pro rata on defence research and development than our industrial competitors. At the same time, we spend two-thirds of the amount lashed out by our competitors on civil research and development.

This probably accounts for the age old fact that, though we Brits often invent things, it is other people who go away and develop them into something worthwhile that works. And in working, it is those other people that make the living and, possibly, contribute something to the total sum of humanity.

One of the latest examples of this has been happily rammed down our throats by the jolly Blue giant, IBM. It now has a 16 Mbit Token Ring Local Area Network system available as an of-the shelf product. This, as the aged and decrepit amongst us will remember, was originally a Brit invention. One can only assume that, once the military R&D wallas had found they couldn't pass the token by stuffing it up a gun barrel and shooting it at someone they, and by definition the rest of the nation's R&D funders, promptly lost interest in it.

IBM in the UK has also happily pointed an indirect finger at the UK Government on other aspects of its support for research. In a recent burst of munificence, it donated some £3 millions worth of computer kit to the United Nations Environment Programme to help it in its work of monitoring the state of our corner of the universe. Several things have to be said at once. This is, first of all, a GOOD THING which IBM has done, for as anyone with half an eye can see, our corner of the universe is already getting full enough with crap to be near unsaveable.

Second of all it is, according to UNEP, three times the amount of money donated to the cause by the UK Government, which is hardly surprising; saving the world costs money and the profit, if any, won't come in a form accountants can reckon up on an abacus.

Third of all, it gives IBM lots of wonderful publicity as the benign, far-sighted, public spirited corporation which only has our best interests at heart. Like all such corporations, this is only partly the truth. Yes, IBM management (in this instance with IBM UK's boss, Tony Cleaver, playing the part of Nostradamus) is being somewhat more far-sighted than some companies, but the PR it can gain is excellent, and does help mask one or two things.

For example, it was IBM that made a considerable toxic Poo in Silicon Valley when a waste tank full of obnoxious gunge sprung a leak into the water table. The short term effects of this have been dealt with, but no-one is quite sure how much of the gunge is still down there in the ground, waiting to bite back. The company is also amongst the Valley's leaders in letting huge amounts of grotty unmentionables slip past the backstop and into the atmosphere. Yes, a bit of positive PR never goes amiss.

There is also a potentially more sinister implication to the exercise. I attended the announcement of IBM's donation with handsome and leonine David Tebbutt and it was he who spotted the neat little political scam. It would seem from reading between the lines that IBM's donation is geared to producing a world in which corporate growth can continue ad nauseam. In accepting, UNEP is seen to support this position.

Now, I know that I am splendidly naive, but I have never been able to work out how a finite world is supposed to support an infinite number of mega-corporations that want to continue infinite growth infinitely. Unless someone has invented a new form of quantum accounting that has passed me by, this whole idea must remain a logical absurdity.

It is also fairly prejudicial to the whole process. If UNEP were to be actually hamstrung by the need to perform environmental research which only benefited corporate growth, then we would all have a problem. This is, indirectly, another function of the research game that has been pointed out in Dr Bray's report.

He not only points to research into computer modelling as essential to increase our understanding of the environment - the very role for IBM's hardware donations - he observes that we must not fall into the trap of not taking obvious remedial actions simply because 'the research' has not yet been completed.

Corporations and public utilities are kicking tons of extremely nasty crap into the air that we all breath, and it shouldn't be an argument about money or the non-availability of conclusive evidence that makes us realise it is stupid not to do something to reduce, if not stop it.

And, the perennial question tacked on to the end of all such polemics: what has this got to do with the average personal computer owner? Well, I suppose it is primarily awareness. Be aware of what is happening to the environment, and in whose interests. Be aware also that the pleasure and intellectual challenge you get from playing games or adventures can also be better employed, for example, in modelling your own corner of the world to make sure it is ship-shape. After all, the one thing UNEP needs even more than computers to model on is skilled people who understand how to make the models in the first place.

So get practicing on your hi-tech plasticine. You could also learn to swim, of course. The way the greenhouse effect is going, that would be a good skill to have in reserve.

end