To try and centralize the discussion around this Micah Sifry announced the launch of ObamaCTO.org. The site allows anyone to create an account and then join in with the ongoing discussions, add your own ideas to the mix and vote suggestions up or down.

ObamaCTO.org

No related posts.

Damn that’s a pretty heady title to have hanging around your neck. To be the person responsible of dragging the U.S. government kicking and screaming into the real technology present; and prepared for an ever changing technological future, is a hellva job description to try and fill. This is exactly the position that is going to be up for grabs under an Obama administration and is getting a lot of press from within the tech blogosphere.

When this idea of a White House CTO first started making waves through the tech blogosphere we heard names like Lessig to Winer being proposed to fill the position. Now we hear that Eric Scmidt of Google has stated he wouldn’t be interested in the position if offered it (bullshit) and so the guessing carries on. As interesting as this discussion might be it is all centered around the singular idea that whoever fills the job should be a thinker from the Web 2.0 social networking social media world of the web.

WRONG, wrong, wrong.

This is so many ways from wrong it isn’t even funny but the attitude is a perfect example of the inflated sense of importance that permeates that part of the web. For them everything is about social media and all that other related warm and fuzzy stuff – for them the tech world gravitates around them and their philosophies. Sorry guys but it doesn’t and anyone that thinks so is as narrow minded as the anti-CTO people.

The fact is that the U.S. is losing its place as a leader in the technology fields and it will need a concentrated effort from both government and business to even make it back to the top of the pile let alone take the lead for innovation and excellence. However limiting the filling of what could be one of the more important positions in any White House; now and the road ahead, to someone who might be a shining star in social media but across the broader tech field is a bit player is being extremely short sighted.

Technology isn’t just the Internet and as important as that is it is only a small portion of what a CTO would have to be concerned with. Technology is everything from the hardware to the software to the connectivity (and sharing) of all kinds. It isn’t just limited to making sure everyone in the government has a frikken Facebook page or uses Twitter or writes a blog. For a CTO it is the very infrastructure that all of the government; and citizens, will be using.

Does it work right?

Is it on par with other competing countries around the world?

Does everyone have equal access?

Looking beyond our myopic look at the Internet being the cure for all our ills we need to understand that a CTO cannot; and should not, be solely about that one thing. Dan Farber has a great post today on the subject and provides us with a great list of some of the things that will be a part of any White House CTO’s purview

• Protect the Openness of the Internet
• Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership
• Protect Our Children While Preserving the First Amendment
• Safeguard our Right to Privacy
• Open Up Government to its Citizens
• Bring Government into the 21st Century
• Deploy Next-Generation Broadband
• Promote American Businesses Abroad
• Invest in the Sciences
• Invest in University-Based Research
• Make the R&D Tax Credit Permanent
• Ensure Competitive Markets
• Protect American Intellectual Property Abroad
• Protect American Intellectual Property at Home
• Reform the Patent System
• Restore Scientific Integrity to the White House
• Make Math and Science Education a National Priority
• Improve and Prioritize Science Assessments
• Address the Dropout Crisis
• Pinpoint College Aid for Math and Science Students
• Increase Science and Math Graduates
• Lower Health Care Costs by Investing in Electronic Information Technology Systems
• Invest in Climate-Friendly Energy Development and Deployment
• Modernize Public Safety Networks
• Advance the Biomedical Research Field
• Advance Stem Cell Research

In the overall view of that list we can see that the Internet is only a part of what needs to be dealt with. As such any person filling that position has to have a broader view of technology than just what the proponents of Web 2.0 and social media would like us to believe. That doesn’t mean that the Internet isn’t important and that it is in dire need of some serious attention but the web is bigger than Web 2.0 or social media regardless of how self-important proponents of the movement like to think. The fact is that the web and its underlying infrastructure in North America; and the U.S. in particular, is in sad shape when compared to the rest of the world.

Alan Patrick from Broadstuff points this out in a post today as well

Work we are doing in understanding the evolution of the Internet implies that one of the biggest drivers of competitiveness going forward will be top class digital logistics. It was ever thus – first class comms have been the hallmarks of great societies from the first Sumerian runners (the SandalNet) onwards.

However, the buildout of the huge pipes in Asia seems to be missing most Western commentators on the Arts Technical except for the odd remembrance. To recap, Korea has built out a very high speed internet system via a combination of government, corporate and consumer collaboration.

Why is this?

Well it boils down to two things in my opinion. The first is a total lack of strong governmental direction and support. I don’t propose that the government take over the whole Internet infrastructure but I do believe that they can strongly suggest to the industries involved that it would be in their best interests to work together and improve what we have. It can do this in many ways that doesn’t require taking ownership. Like Doc Searls says

Regardless of what we do, we must liberate the Net (including the carriers) from telecom reguation. It’s too new, too different, and too important to be shackled by the boat-anchors of the 1934 and 1996 telecom acts — and by addenda to those acts, even if they are meant to improve existing law on behalf of the Net.

Liberating the web from the telecoms doesn’t necessitate taking over the pipes but it does mean that whoever the CTO ends up being they have to have the bite to go along with their bark. We can’t be just instituting another toothless watchdog branch of the government like we have in the past.

This is a job that is far more important than promoting the cause of Web 2.0 and social media. Sure there is no denying that those things are a part of it all but really they are only a small part of a much larger picture – a much larger need. Whoever is tapped to take the position as America’s tech CTO needs to be someone who has a deep understanding of technology as a whole not just a small part of it. They will need to understand how all the different parts of technology need to be brought together in order to return the U.S. to the technological powerhouse it once was.

Equally so business will need to be made to understand that this is something that is more important than the short term shareholder profits. For too long now the technology sector in the U.S. has been treated like a pig trough for everyone to gouge their unsustanable greed out of. In the end it is the people and the country that has paid the price. This is also something that the White House CTO is going to have to deal with and it won’t be happening on some Facebook page or some intern managed blog.

I have no idea who the Obama Administration will be looking to to take on this job but I sure hope that they don’t just rely on the potifications coming out of the tech blogosphere in making their choice.

Related posts:

1. CNN shuts Tech news division as O’Brien leaves network
2. Who Else Wants a House that Tweets?
3. Kumar goes to the White House

Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt, rumored as the front runner for the role of America’s first Chief Technology Officer, has gone on the record saying he’d say no if offered the position.

While long being spoken about in the role, Schmidt became favorite for the position after being named on President Elect Obama’s 17-person economic transition economic advisory board.

“I love working at Google and I’m very happy to stay at Google, so the answer is no,” Schmidt told CNBC host Jim Cramer when asked about the rumors.

According to Reuters, he also said Obama shares his belief that green technology can help to revitalize the economy. Laid-off autoworkers in Michigan could be put back to work building batteries for use in hybrid vehicles, Schmidt said on the show.

Related posts:

1. Eric Schmidt fails both the boards he sits on
2. Google CEO Eric Schmidt to Newspaper Association of America – Change or Die
3. National CTO a Good Idea But Please God Not Schmidt

Never before have we seen such a miss-mash of policies and directions on the road forward being dictated by corporations who actually control the very access to the Internet. Where once the US was the shining beacon of incredible innovations, unlimited access and capless downloading we are now seeing these corporate gatekeepers instituting data and speed caps with less money being spent on improving our Internet infrastructure than any other developed; and in some case underdeveloped, countries.

Into this confusing and corporate controlled Internet landscape Barack Obama is suggesting that if he is elected as the President of the United States one of the first things he will do is create a National Chief Technology Officer (CTO) that would be a cabinet level position and who would be there to advise the President on all things to do with technology. While McCain hasn’t jumped on board with the same idea the possibility of there being someone at the cabinet level who can influence the country’s technological future is making some people rather nervous.

Before going any further it is important that we understand exactly what a CTO is and what their typical duties are. Whether this would hold true given the influence such a person would have on a governmental level it is still important to have some background info. From the Wikipedia entry for Chief Technical Officer (CTO) we get the following explanation

A chief technical officer or chief technology officer (abbreviated as CTO) is an executive position whose holder is focused on scientific and technical issues within an organization. Often, the CTO will oversee technical staff at a company, particularly those building products or creating services that embody industry-specific technologies. In some cases the CTO will also oversee the work of the research and development organizations. There is currently no commonly shared definition of the CTO position or that person’s responsibilities. Young start-ups typically have a set of technically hands-on tasks for the CTO, while an international conglomerate may need the CTO to deal with the representatives of foreign governments and industry organizations

Again according to Wikipedia a CTO’s responsibilities are something like this

In practice, the CTO can have many more responsibilities than managing a portfolio of R&D or production projects. This person may report to the CEO and provide a technical voice in the strategic planning for a company. CTOs like Greg Papadopoulos at Sun Microsystems and Padmasree Warrior formerly at Motorola work closely with the CEO to help determine what types of products or services the company should focus on.

Now much of the talk currently about a National CTO is how that person would be tasked with developing a comprehensive plan for nationwide broadband access and if that is the case then I find myself much in agreement with Mark ‘Rizzn’ Hopkins. In a post today on Mashable Mark questioned the idea behind needing a national CTO

 

So how much, exactly, got collected into the Universal Service Fund, and what did we get for that? An excellent question; one that Jeff Pulver’s guest blogger Daniel Berninger asked in the summer of 2006. You can read the whole answer over there, but the short version is not much (single digit increases in basic service penetration, and overall double-digit per customer increases in consumer costs).

Bringing this back around to the whole CTO thing…

This is what we want a CTO for? So that he or she can empower the major telcos to take and squander more of our money? This is the definition of intelligent change and hope?

 

In effect we already have the pieces in place; and have had for years, needed to fund a broadband plan that could make the United States the envy of the world when it comes to ubiquitous broadband access. However no amount of cajoling or threatening by our current political machinery has made even a single telco to live up to the obligations that they were required to fulfill. To think that having a national CTO would make any difference in this one specific area is stupid and extremely shortsighted.

Now on the other hand if an Obama led White House is serious about changing the rules of the game and truly interested in moving the country forward by laying a good rock solid foundation for a complete technology policy then yes I believe that having a national CTO is a good idea. However, like all good ideas this one is fraught with problems with the most obvious being who would be the person to take up this position.

Already names are being floated around with names like Eric Schmidt (Google), Vint Cerf (Google), Steve Ballmer (Microsoft), Jeffret Bezos (Amazon) along with Ed Felton and Larry Lessig. With the exception of one of those names the very possibility of people like Schmidt, Ballmer or Bezos would be enough to kill the new CTO position before it even got off the ground. The fact is that anyone looking to fill this ultimate CTO position should not have any association whatsoever with any tech related company as it would immediately call into question any decisions they make.

This is a position that in reality could be one of the most important cabinet position created in a very long time as it could have enormous impact on our country moving forward and whoever is in charge must be above reproach. And don’t give me that bit about how elected officials have to place all their stock holdings and business dealing in a blind trust. We have see how that has worked in the past an even now with people like Chaney you can bet because of his association with Halliburton that he doesn’t have a nice retirement fund waiting for him and / or a snazzy new position will open up for him the day he leaves offices.

The idea of a national CTO is a good one given that it isn’t just narrowly focused on enhancing telco profit margins by more boondoggle programs like the ones we have had in the past. Having soething like a national CTO executive could be a great thing as long as it was an all encompassing plan from the ground up with making easy and ubiquitous access for all people the cornerstone that the new infrastructure is built on.

Related posts:

1. Eric Schmidt says he’s not interested in CTO position
2. Australia commits $43b to network that will be redundant before it’s finished
3. Now this is how you do broadband

Mark takes the valid libertarian line, that we are better off without Government interference in the tech sector. It’s a just idea, and as much as no Government interference is a noble cause, it’s also unrealistic. In the United States at least the tech sector is a major driver of growth and jobs and naturally the Government will notice, the question then becomes whether they participate from an informed position or one that is completely clueless, and I need to point no further than my native Australia to give an example of what clueless Government interference offers.

The appointment on a CTO of the United States may be in part symbolic, but it is a position that has the possibility of delivering real knowledge to the gears of power. Real knowledge that understands the dynamics of the Valley and the broader internet industry. Perhaps knowledge that recognizes the issues with copyright law and the DMCA. Knowledge that understands and respects the notion of the public good and the public domain, and that the American Constitution dealt with copyright as a notion to promote scientific and artistic endeavor, not corporate greed.

From a global perspective we need the United States to lead on this front. It’s a given that should the United States appoint a CTO, that other countries will follow. The word of the potential of technology and the internet needs to be spread far and wide as a force of good, and to give a voice and platform to many as opposed to a select few.

The Inquisitr is backing Dave Winer for the spot, and although there was some jest in the original post, the more I talk to people about the idea, the more I may actually believe it has validity. Winer is a strong Democrat, who introduced me as a foreign blogger to Dean in the last cycle, and although he may not be the worlds happiest person, he offers a depth of thought that is often lacking in the world of governance. Winer would challenge norms, he would make people think, and he’d use the position to champion much of which we all support. On a ticket that promotes change, Winer offers a boat load of difference.

Related posts:

1. Dave Winer for CTO of the United States
2. Bigger issue than 1984 being pulled by Amazon is that 1984 isn’t in the public domain
3. It’s Biden! Now lets make Winer CTO

The question is though, who will become the first CTO of the United States of America? There’s no set criteria, no precedent, no rules or regulations around the position, which opens the candidate field wide. Robert Scoble has chimed in with his list of possible candidates, and alongside Bill Gates he suggests the god father of blogging, Dave Winer.

I won’t be able to vote, but given most of you reading this live in the United States, you may have influence. Dave Winer would make a most excellent US CTO, and we now give him our full support should he decide to officially put his name forward. Winer knows RSS, he knows blogging, and he isn’t shy is sharing his opinions. Spread the word: Winer for CTO.

I haven’t got access to Photoshop at the moment to create Winer for CTO buttons, but if you do decide to join the cause, leave a comment with link to logo and we’ll add it to the post.

Related posts:

1. It’s Biden! Now lets make Winer CTO
2. Clocks go forward in the United States for Daylight Savings Time Tonight
3. What Dave Winer doesn’t get – it’s about the simplicity