Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 22, 1998)
CONTACTING US NEWSROOM: (541)346-5511 E-MAJL ode@oregon uoregcxvedu ADDRESS: Oregon Datfy Emerald P.0 BOX 3159 Eugene, Oregon 97403 unlmc tut i iuh: www uoregon.eau/~oae EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarah Kickler EDITORIAL EDITOR Mike Schmierbach NIGHT EDITOR Holly Sanders ■■aXHMMaaHIINraiHWHIHIMHnBn Students and scientists alike should question University contracts with the U.S. military It doesn’t get the high-profile protests that the Nike dona tion has, though the grant money it brings in amounts to 5 percent of total University grants. Indeed, the researchers here are at the top of their field, but it seems no one knows the lab is there at all. It’s the Computational Intelli gence Research Lab, where some OPINION Jeff Shaw ot tne best artih cial intelligence minds in the world do re search for the U.S. military. For all the con troversy about the Riverfront Research Park, CIRL seems to have escaped notice, though it is currently working on a $2.7 million project developing, planning and sched uling technologies for the Defense Department. It's surprising that, in a com munity so concerned with mili tarism, accepting this type of grant should come without over sight. It is time for the University community to open a dialogue about the contracts and grants we accept. And if the applica tions those grants threaten to create can’t stand up to scrutiny, that tells us something in itself. When told about CIRL’s work, many stu r r* dents express shock. It does n’t seem that there should be any place for military research on the U of O campus. Isn’t that why we have military bases?” Student Senator Michael Olson said. "We definitely need to consid er the implications of any re search being done at the Universi ty. I don’t see how military research contributes to the acade mic development of students at the U of O. I don’t see how that fits into our mission statement.” For Matt Ginsberg, founder and director of CLRL, it’s about a com mitment to science. “The reason I have no problem taking military money is because they let me do the science,” Ginsberg told me. And though they look for work with “attractive peacetime appli cations,” they have no problem taking the readily available mili tary contracts. Indeed, one reason CTRL ac cepts Defense Department back ing is because military grants are far easier to come by than other sources. “The federal govern ment, because they have this mil itary motivation behind it, is far much more able to provide re search funding than, say, Federal Express would be,” said David Etherington, current director of CIRL. Other universities are suc cumbing to the militarization of academia as well. Today, the De fense Department provides 71 percent of federal research funds toward computer science, a 26 percent increase over the last two decades. As public funding for universi ties wanes, institu tions reach out for lucra tive De fense De partment contracts. But if any thing, this should encourage universities who cherish peace to resist the rising tide. Do we real ly want to be like USC, whose Information Sciences Institute re searches attack helicopters? Or Carnegie Mellon, where a robot driven tank is under develop ment? Students I spoke with said it makes them uncomfortable to know this university does mili tary work. It should — ultimately, we are responsible for what goes on in our communities. Democra cy is all about ordinary people speaking up when questionable activities surround them. And don’t scientists, too, have an obligation to consider who their benefactors are, and how those benefactors might use their work? In Ginsberg’s view, not necessarily: “We provide technol ogy. And yes, we care how tech nology is used; yes, we want peo ple to know that it can be used for good or ill... but fundamentally, that's not our decision to make. And when we decided to become scientists, we were at some level agreeing to give that up. We do the work, and it’s up to society to apply it sensibly.” This rationale sounds too much like science without a social con science. Knowledge, once at tained, doesn’t evaporate. The re ality is that CTRL discoveries will either be used for good or they will not; two things can happen to push matters in the right direc tion. If Ginsberg is right, it falls to citizens to direct research toward life-affirming ends. We at the Uni versity can’t do that without knowledge of and power over University contracts and grants. The University should establish a student board to oversee grant ac ceptance. Besides helping to stop the advance of corporate control, it just might make the whole sys tem more open and democratic. Next, the CIRL team should recognize that nothing happens devoid of social context. Grants from the military are not free gifts, and they could carry a weighty moral price. CIRL should look elsewhere for backing. Jeff Shaw is a columnistfor the Emerald. His work appears on alter nate Wednesdays. His views do not necessarily represent those of the newspaper. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 1 Enough already This is an open letter to any and all members of OSPIRG involved in this year’s biannual campaign: We know you’re up for renewal. We know you want our vote, but enough already! For a group supposedly devoted to environmental is sues, you seem to use about four times as much paper on campus as any other group. Posters, sometimes three to a bul letin board: cards and fliers on every sin gle conceivable flat surface in every build ing; letters to the Emerald nearly every day (what, do you assign them to your mem bers?); sandwich boards on many comers; etc. 1 believe a truly environmentally re sponsible organization would cease and desist these wasteful tactics. You’ve defi nitely lost my vote — because of your hyp ocritical behavior. Oayna Terry English Yes on 1,6 There are two ballot measures before the student body this year that I hope pass by large margins: Question 1, for continued OSPIRG funding, and Question 6, for the elevator that will provide wheelchair ac cess to the International Lounge, the ODE and the EMU Art Gallery. First, Question 6: a major portion of the EMU has been off-limits to students in wheelchairs and construction of an eleva tor is needed to remedy this. Remodeling the EMU has drained reserves to the point that, unless students pitch in, there simply won’t be enough money to build one. The ASUO has shown strong support for this project by committing about $200,000 to ward the elevator construction. Please add your support! Vote yes on Question 6. On Question 1:1 have valued OSPIRG’s advocacy for the individual and the down trodden, as well as its watchdog attitude toward big business “attacks” on the envi ronment. Watchdogs are not popular with thieves and robbers. Please vote yes on Question 1. Say no to the influx of off-cam pus, big-business money aimed at defeat ing this measure and closing down OS PIRG. OSP1RG is on the enemy list of big business and out-of-state interests in Ore gon; don’t let them fool you — it’s not for YOUR good! Vote YES on 1! Jim Long Chemistry Instructor Vote for ‘fresh face’ All things in life move in cycles. If any one thing remains stagnant, it is bound to go bad. The ASUO is no exception to this rule. New people need to constantly circu late through the student government in or der to ensure the full representation of the students and their changing needs. Jessica Timpany is the “fresh face” that the Stu dent Senate and the EMU board long for. She comes to the ballot with proven new and enthusiastic energy to be involved and to represent the students. As the visibility coordinator for the ASUO Executive office, Jessica has the ex perience of working with all branches of our government. Her newness to the ASUO gives her the ability to look at the is sues at hand with unbiased and uncor rupted eyes. Most important, Jessica has the gall to question the present workings of our ASUO system and the passion to better it. Jessica Timpany is not running for office to pad her rgsumd or to climb the political ladder. She is doing this simply because in some twisted and funky way, she really enjoys it. Jessica is doing this be cause protecting student programs, stu dent control the incidental fees and fight ing the students’ fights excites her. Jessica Timpany is coming to the ballot as a real student who is in touch with the wants, needs and concerns of the student body. Jessica is the true voice of the stu dents, as was proven by her victory in the primary elections. Elect Jessica Timpany to EMU board finance senator seat no. 5 one more time! Ben Unger ASUO Vice President F CORRECTION In the story “Prospective CPAs will need to take five-year program in 2000" (ODE April 20), the local accounting firm should have been named as Jones and Roth PC. The Emerald regrets the error. LETTERS POLICY The Emerald accepts letters from mem bers of the University and Eugene commu nity, preferably under 400 words. Shorter letters will receive higher priority. Op-ed pieces will only be printed, at the discretion of the editor, if they are written by an au thority about a pertinent issue. Letters can be submitted in person at EMU Suite 300, mailed to P.0. Box 3159, Eugene, OR, 97403, or e-mailed to ode@oregon.uore gon.edu. Please include your full name and telephone number for confirmation. The Emerald reserves the right to edit for length or style.
