Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.

Hacker is a term that has been used to mean a variety of different things in computing. Depending on the context, the term could refer to a person in any one of several distinct (but not completely disjoint) communities and subcultures:

• A community of enthusiast computer programmers and systems designers, originated in the 1960s around the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT's) Tech Model Railroad Club (TMRC) and MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. This community is notable for launching the free software movement. The World Wide Web and the Internet itself are also hacker artifacts. The Request for Comments RFC 1392 amplifies this meaning as "[a] person who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and computer networks in particular."
• People committed to circumvention of computer security. This primarily concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a communication networks such as the Internet (Black hats), but also includes those who debug or fix security problems (White hats), and the morally ambiguous Grey hats. See Hacker (computer security).

Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer criminals, due to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s. This includes what hacker slang calls “script kiddies,” people breaking into computers using programs written by others, with very little knowledge about the way they work. This usage has become so predominant that the general public is unaware that different meanings exist. While the self-designation of hobbyists as hackers is acknowledged by all three kinds of hackers, and the computer security hackers accept all uses of the word, people from the programmer subculture consider the computer intrusion related usage incorrect, and emphasize the difference between the two by calling to security breakers “crackers” (analogous to a safecracker).


Gary McKinnon (born 10 February 1966) is a Scottish systems administrator and hacker who has been accused of what one US prosecutor claims is the "biggest military computer hack of all time," although McKinnon himself states that he was merely looking for evidence of free energy suppression and a cover-up of UFO activity and other technologies potentially useful to the public. After a series of legal proceedings in England, McKinnon is currently awaiting extradition to the United States.

Hacker is a term that has been used to mean a variety of different things in computing. Depending on the context, the term could refer to a person in any one of several distinct (but not completely disjoint) communities and subcultures:

• A community of enthusiast computer programmers and systems designers, originated in the 1960s around the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT's) Tech Model Railroad Club (TMRC) and MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. This community is notable for launching the free software movement. The World Wide Web and the Internet itself are also hacker artifacts. The Request for Comments RFC 1392 amplifies this meaning as "[a] person who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and computer networks in particular." See Hacker (programmer subculture).
• The hobbyist home computing community, focusing on hardware in the late 1970s (e.g. the Homebrew Computer Club) and on software (computer games, software cracking, the demoscene) in the 1980s/1990s. The community included Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak and Bill Gates and created the personal computing industry. See Hacker (hobbyist).
• People committed to circumvention of computer security. This primarily concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a communication networks such as the Internet (Black hats), but also includes those who debug or fix security problems (White hats), and the morally ambiguous Grey hats. See Hacker (computer security).

Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer criminals, due to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s. This includes what hacker slang calls “script kiddies,” people breaking into computers using programs written by others, with very little knowledge about the way they work. This usage has become so predominant that the general public is unaware that different meanings exist. While the self-designation of hobbyists as hackers is acknowledged by all three kinds of hackers, and the computer security hackers accept all uses of the word, people from the programmer subculture consider the computer intrusion related usage incorrect, and emphasize the difference between the two by calling to security breakers “crackers” (analogous to a safecracker).

McKinnon is accused of hacking into 97 United States military and NASA computers over a 13-month period between February 2001 and March 2002, using the name 'Solo'. The computer networks he is accused of hacking include networks owned by NASA, the US Army, US Navy, Department of Defense, and the US Air Force.
The US authorities claim he deleted critical files from operating systems, which shut down the US Army’s Military District of Washington network of 2,000 computers for 24 hours, as well as deleting US Navy Weapons logs, rendering a naval base's network of 300 computers inoperable after the September 11th terrorist attacks. McKinnon is also accused of copying data, account files and passwords onto his own computer. US authorities claim the cost of tracking and correcting the problems he caused was over $700,000.
McKinnon has denied causing any damage, arguing that, in his quest for UFO-related material, he accessed open, unsecured machines with no passwords and no firewalls and that he left countless notes pointing out their many security failings. He disputes the damage and the financial loss claimed by the US as concocted in order to create a dollar amount justifying an extraditable offence. While not admitting that it constituted evidence of destruction, McKinnon did admit leaving a threat on one computer:

US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorism these days … It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year … I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels …

US authorities claim that McKinnon is trying to downplay his own actions. A senior military officer at the Pentagon told The Sunday Telegraph: "US policy is to fight these attacks as strongly as possible. As a result of Mr McKinnon's actions, we suffered serious damage. This was not some harmless incident. He did very serious and deliberate damage to military and Nasa computers and left silly and anti-America messages. All the evidence was that someone was staging a very serious attack on US computer systems.


HACKER ETHICS :

Hacker work is, in the words of the hacker Linus Torvalds, "interesting, exciting, and joyous", "intrinsically interesting and challenging" and "goes beyond the realm of surviving or of economic life" . That these features are intrinsic to the work, rather than being a subjective attitude on the part of the individual, is demonstrated by a comment from an employee of Microsoft. The company competes with the work of hackers, often attacking them, and so charged an employee with the task of investigating the competitiveness of the hackers' work. Without any bias in favour of hackers, he wrote that when hacking on their software, "the feeling was exhilarating and addictive" (OSI, 1998).
It is important to note that when hackers talk about intrinsic motivation they almost always use adjectives like "fun", "passionate", "joyous" and "entertaining". In contemporary society we maintain a distinction between work and leisure, and are acutely aware of when work erodes the time we usually dedicate to leisure. To hackers, the distinction is a non sequitor. Hacking on some challenging code is every bit as entertaining as playing a game of football or reading a book, albeit in a different way. Not all play is "something wasteful [or] frivolous", and can be "the experience of being an active, creative and fully autonomous person"; to hack "is to dedicate yourself to realizing your full human potential; to take an essentially active, rather than passive stance towards your environment; and to be constantly guided in this by your sense of fulfilment (sic), meaning and satisfaction" .
This guiding sense is apparent in hackers' approach to work management, and specifically in how they decide what to work on. The dominant factor, according to most theorists, is the desire to "scratch and itch", i.e. to satisfy a need . This need may be a functional one where the hacker needs a particular bit of software, or it may be a personal one where the hacker wants to try his hand at a particular technique. Most hacker work is entered into voluntarily because it is "intellectually stimulating", because it "improves skills" and because of the code's "work functionality" . If this is the case, then the adjectives given by Torvalds and the Microsoft employee should not be thought of as the sole motivations for work, nor solely as pleasant byproducts, but rather as factors that affect how a hackers prefer to scratch their itches.
This orientation around the activity and its inherent worth gives rise to a meritocratic form of organisation. According to Levy, "Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position." If a hacker wants to pursue a line of work, they simply start hacking and gain approval from other hackers when their work shows merit. Access to computing equipment and advice from fellow hackers isn't restricted by bureaucracy or unjust social arrangements . Of course meritocracies place demanding barriers to entry insofar as they require a certain level of skill and aptitude. They also fail to emphasise other aspects of personality or capability that we might find positive such as race and gender, which may be "deeply felt" by some individuals . This problem can be overcome simply by acknowledging the positive aspects of equal opportunities, and of social duties that help the less able; these suggestions are coherent with the hackers' work ethic.
Weizenbaum, an early critic of hackers, suggested that hackers work "without definite purpose". Unable to set long-term goals or analyse information in a teleological context, he claimed that hackers are aimless and disembodied. Compulsively scratching itches, Weizenbaum's hacker is like a hyperactive child who may engage passionately in frenzied activity without ever achieving anything. This is a culture that he describes as "instrumental rationality", the result of the belief that if some task is technically feasible then it is worth performing . For a work ethic to be truly fulfilling, truly meaningful, he suggests that it must account for some kind of worthwhile aim towards which the hackers' activity is directed. However, as Hannemyr (1999) has pointed out, hackers create products not only for the pleasure of the work but also for the utility and beauty of the products themselves. Hackers value "flexibility, tailorability, modularity and openendedness to facilitate on-going experimentation". The activity of creation may not be as aimless as Weizenbaum suggests, however one can still object that these aims are limited. Creating for the sake of abstract features in the product could still be characterised as a form of instrumental rationality, without wider personal or social goals such as the creation of tools that enhance personal life quality or that meet a pressing social need.
Wiezenbaum could reply that such a creative act would simply fetishise the role of information and activities that create it, without good reason to value them as abstract entities. He could further point out that such an attitude would have no objection to creating harmful products, such as software that facilitates anonymous online transfer of child pornography, if the creation of the product was particularly enjoyable and if the code was deemed to be beautiful. This lack of focus on outcome leads to an ambuguity in the work ethic: is it the case that hackers value characteristics inherent to the work and the code they create, or do they also account for the use value of the products? This ambiguity makes it difficult to say, given that they have a limited amount of time during which to hack, how they should spend it.
The hackers' work ethic, insofar as it concentrates on how one should work and why it should be motivating, invites the charge of self-indulgence. It argues for an autonomy in work that facilitates personal fulfilment without clarifying this ambiguity of values, and without accounting for social obligations that might reasonably abridge this autonomy. The Hacker Ethic does, however, encapsulate social obligations in part (c) mentioned above. These obligations can be most clearly studied in the free software movement, an applied example of the hackers' social ethic.
 


R Surender Naik
CH09B071

Read more »

Hacker & hacker ethics

Who is hacker?

The word “hacker” refers to someone who breaks into systems to damage it, or for the purpose of getting illegitimate access to resources.

It can also be defined as a person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.

The Hacker's Ethics

The idea of a "hacker ethic" is perhaps best formulated in Steven Levy's 1984 book, Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. Levy came up with six tenets:

1. Access to computers - and anything which might teach you something about the way the world works - should be unlimited and total. Always yield to the Hands-On imperative!
2. All information should be free.
3. Mistrust authority - promote decentralization.
4. Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degress, age, race, or position.
5. You can create art and beauty on a computer.
6. Computers can change your life for the better.

PHRACK, recognized as the "official" hacker newsletter, expanded on this creed with a rationale that can be summarized in three principles ("Doctor Crash," 1986).

[1] First, hackers reject the notion that "businesses" are the only groups entitled to access and use of modern technology.

[2] Second, hacking is a major weapon in the fight against encroaching computer technology.

[3] Finally, the high cost of equipment is beyond the means of most hackers, which results in the perception that hacking and phreaking are the only recourse to spreading computer literacy to the masses:

"Hacking. It is a full time hobby, taking countless hours per week to learn, experiment, and execute the art of penetrating multi-user computers: Why do hackers spend a good portion of their time hacking? Some might say it is scientific curiosity, others that it is for mental stimulation. But the true roots of hacker motives run much deeper than that. In this file I will describe the underlying motives of the aware hackers, make known the connections between Hacking, Phreaking, Carding, and Anarchy, and make known the "techno-revolution" which is laying seeds in the mind of every hacker. . . .If you need a tutorial on how to perform any of the above stated methods {of hacking}, please read a {PHRACK} file on it. And whatever you do, continue the fight. Whether you know it or not, if you are a hacker, you are a revolutionary. Don't worry, you're on the right side". ("Doctor Crash," 1986)

Although hackers freely acknowledge that their activities may be occasionally illegal, considerable emphasis is placed on limiting violations only to those required to obtain access and learn a system, and they display hostility toward those who transgress beyond beyond these limits. Most experienced CU members are suspicious of young novices who are often entranced with what they perceive to be the "romance" of hacking. Elite hackers complain continuously that novices are at an increased risk of apprehension and also can "trash" accounts on which experienced hackers have gained and hidden their access.

In sum, the hacker style reflects well-defined goals, communication networks, values, and an ethos of resistance to authority. Because hacking requires a broader range of knowledge than does phreaking, and because such knowledge can be acquired only through experience, hackers tend to be both older and more knowledgeable than phreaks. In addition, despite some overlap, the goals of the two are somewhat dissimilar. As a consequence, each group constitutes a separate analytic category. 
                        
Linus Torvald:

Linu's law appears in the prologue written by Linus torvald, who is the creator of the Linux operating system and one of the world's most famous hackers.It states that all the motivations (of hackers) fall into 3 categories and progress is about going through those very simple things in process of evolution.The categories in order are Survival , Social life and Entertainment .To hackers survival is not the main thing , by the time u have comp on ur desk, its not likely that your first worry is how to get next meal or keep a roof over ur head ,Survival is still a motivation factor,but is not really a main concern.He defines a hacker as a person who has progressed beyond first category and motivated by the II and III.Linus notes that  this progress from survival to social,to entertainment goals  can only occur if survival concerns are not foremost in one's mind .

-N.HARDEV
  CH09B066

Read more »

Who is a hacker? Discussed with help of a contemporary example – Tim Berners-Lee

Hacker is a term that has been used to mean a variety of different things in computing. Depending on the context, the term could refer to a person in any one of several distinct (but not completely disjoint) communities and subcultures. Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer criminals, due to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s. This includes what hacker slang calls “script kiddies,” people breaking into computers using programs written by others.

Hacker ethic is the generic phrase which describes the values and philosophy that are standard in the hacker community. The early hacker culture and resulting philosophy originated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the 1950s and 1960s. The term 'hacker ethic' is attributed to journalist Steven Levy as described in his book titled Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution, written in 1984. The guidelines of the hacker ethic make it easy to see how computers have evolved into the personal devices we know and rely upon today. The key points within this ethic are access, free information, and improvement to quality of life.

  Tim Berners-Lee:

 Berners-Lee is famed as the inventor of the World Wide Web, the system that we use to access sites, documents and files on the Internet. He has received numerous recognitions, most notably the Millennium Technology Prize.

While a student at Oxford University, Berners-Lee was caught hacking access with a friend and subsequently banned from University computers. w3.org reports, “Whilst [at Oxford], he built his first computer with a soldering iron, TTL gates, an M6800 processor and an old television.” Technological innovation seems to have run in his genes, as Berners-Lee’s parents were mathematicians who worked on the Manchester Mark1, one of the earliest electronic computers.

While working with CERN, a European nuclear research organization, Berners-Lee created a hypertext prototype system that helped researchers share and update information easily. He later realized that hypertext could be joined with the Internet. Berners-Lee recounts how he put them together: “I just had to take the hypertext idea and connect it to the TCP and DNS ideas and – ta-da! – the World Wide Web.”

Since his creation of the World Wide Web, Berners-Lee founded the World Wide Web Consortium at MIT. The W3C describes itself as “an international consortium where Member organizations, a full-time staff and the public work together to develop Web standards.” Berners-Lee’s World Wide Web idea, as well as standards from the W3C, is distributed freely with no patent or royalties due.

Gokul
CH09B065

Read more »

Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.

Abstract:

This Post deals with defining a Hacker and the meaning of “Hacker Ethic” by taking into example of the -the face behind the facebook – MARK ZUCKERBERG

Introduction:

Are Hackers good or hacker’s are bad? Why do any one hack? The answer swiftly comes saying to “learn more about the system”, to know how the system really works, or sometimes to find out the loop holes in the system or to steal something. Each hacker wants to have recognition.Are the ethics which they follow,does they go on with the normal world ?

Who is a Hacker?

Hacker is a term that has been used to mean a variety of different things in computing. A community of enthusiast computer programmers and system designers, originated in the 1960s around the MIT's.The world wide web and the internet itself are also hacker artifacts. A person who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and computer networks in particular.” The hobbyist home computing community, focusing on hardware in the late 1970s and on software games in the 1980s/1990s. The community included Steve Jobs,Steve Wozniak and Bill Gates and created the personal computing industry.People committed to circumvention of computer security. This primarily concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a communication networks such as the Internet (Black hats), but also includes those who debug or fix security problems(White hats), and the morally ambiguous Grey hats Hacker (computer security)

Hacker’s Ethic:

The Hacker Ethic The hacker's obsession with computing leads to impatience and intolerance with anything that stands in the way.I want to express about “Hacker’s Ethics” by taking the example of “The face behind the facebook ”  MARK ZUCKERBERG

As the film tells it, during the winter of 2004, Zuckerberg, a curmudgeonly(bad tempered), craven genius, bristling against authority and embittered by the culture of wealth and privilege that excludes him, creates a social network to impress vapid women and the callow preppies of Harvard’s exclusive, all-male final clubs. He took a certain amount of enjoyment out of not necessarily breaking rules, but just pointing out that people who have responsibility for things are kind of stupid. Mark never looked like a person who created a website which can impress many people.

                                                                                                                                                

Mark gained campus notoriety in November 2003, when he created Facemash. The idea behind Facemash was simple: a website on which you could compare the attractiveness of two Harvard students, voting with the click of a mouse. The site, which was open to the world and which used official Harvard headshots, went viral over email lists, nabbing 22,000 votes from over 450 people. Clicking through Facemash filled one with that particular kind of Internet-induced sickness, combining the titillation of an anonymous chat room with the meanness of an old-fashioned slam book. It was callow, it was distasteful, and it was a lot of fun. Facemash managed to offend a lot of people, including Harvard University, seeing as Facemash violated all sorts of usage, privacy, and property codes. Mark was hauled before the Ad Board, Harvard College’s administrative board. While asking a question why and how Facebook is different from other social networking website Mark himself shrugged off his own site. “[Thefacebook.com] is basically the same thing on a different scale. It’s not very novel.” Zuckerberg exhibited a typically cavalier, insurgent attitude—and recklessness with words: “I think it’s kind of silly that it would take the university a couple of years to get around to [building a facebook],” he said. “I can do it better than they can, and I can do it in a week.” This shows his recklessness and insurgent attitude.

This gives an appropriate measure of a millionaire hacker. Who hacked to find the loop holes,for fun, to remove his ex-girlfriend from his mind came with an extra-ordinary social networking site “FACEBOOK”. As any other hacker he does not believe in human relationships and have a better bondage between him and computer. He has a bad attitude against others,which was one reason for the creation of the “Facebook”

Most of the inputs from the movie “The Social Network”

References:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-08/mark-zuckerberg-at-harvard-the-truth-behind-the-social-network/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook

B.Vamshi

EE09B104

Read more »

Who is a HACKER ??

Hacker Defination 


In the media the word "hacker" is often used, for what I would call a "cracker", someone that breaks into systems to damage it, or for the purpose of getting illegitimate access to resources. A definition for hacker is found in The Hacker FAQ by Peter Seebs.
Ari Lukumies wrote:

As far as my terminology serves, crackers are those who give hackers a bad name (because most of the people cannot distinguish the two). Somebody who breaks into other's computer systems, or digs into their code (in order to make a copy-protected program run, for example) is a cracker. Then, someone who's really good at what he does with computers, is called a hacker. A hack, in software circles, is a quickly written short piece of code that makes something work. It may not be beautiful to look at, but it makes things function.

 Hacker ethics

.1 The belief that information-sharing is a powerful positive good, and that it is an ethical duty of hackers to share their expertise by writing open-source code and facilitating access to information and to computing resources wherever possible.

2. The belief that system-cracking for fun and exploration is ethically OK as long as the cracker commits no theft, vandalism, or breach of confidentiality.

Both of these normative ethical principles are widely, but by no means universally, accepted among hackers. Most hackers subscribe to the hacker ethic in sense 1, and many act on it by writing and giving away open-source software. A few go further and assert that all information should be free and any proprietary control of it is bad; this is the philosophy behind the GNU project.
Sense 2 is more controversial: some people consider the act of cracking itself to be unethical, like breaking and entering. But the belief that ‘ethical’ cracking excludes destruction at least moderates the behavior of people who see themselves as ‘benign’ crackers (see also samurai, gray hat). On this view, it may be one of the highest forms of hackerly courtesy to (a) break into a system, and then (b) explain to the sysop, preferably by email from a superuser account, exactly how it was done and how the hole can be plugged — acting as an unpaid (and unsolicited) tiger team.
The most reliable manifestation of either version of the hacker ethic is that almost all hackers are actively willing to share technical tricks, software, and (where possible) computing resources with other hackers. Huge cooperative networks such as Usenet, FidoNet and the Internet itself can function without central control because of this trait; they both rely on and reinforce a sense of community that may be hackerdom's most valuable intangible asset.


Example of  Hacker :
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the hacker culture that Stallman thrived on began to fragment. To prevent software from being used on their competitors' computers, most manufacturers stopped distributing source code and began using copyright and restrictive software licenses to limit or prohibit copying and redistribution. Such proprietary software had existed before, and it became apparent that it would become the norm. This shift in the legal characteristics of software can be regarded as a consequence triggered by the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, as stated by Stallman's MIT fellow Brewster Kahle.
When Brian Reid in 1979 placed time bombs in Scribe to restrict unlicensed access to the software, Stallman proclaimed it "a crime against humanity." He clarified, years later, that it is blocking the user's freedom that he believes is a crime, not the issue of charging for the software.
In 1980, Stallman and some other hackers at the AI Lab were refused access to the source code for the software of the first laser printer, the Xerox 9700. Stallman had modified the software on an older printer (the XGP, Xerographic Printer), so it electronically messaged a user when the person's job was printed, and would message all logged-in users when the printer was jammed. Not being able to add this feature to the Dover printer was a major inconvenience, as the printer was on a different floor from most of the users. This experience convinced Stallman of people's need to be free to modify the software they use.
Richard Greenblatt, a fellow AI Lab hacker, founded Lisp Machines, Inc. (LMI) to market Lisp machines, which he and Tom Knight designed at the lab. Greenblatt rejected outside investment, believing that the proceeds from the construction and sale of a few machines could be profitably reinvested in the growth of the company. In contrast, the other hackers felt that the venture capital-funded approach was better. As no agreement could be reached, hackers from the latter camp founded Symbolics, with the aid of Russ Noftsker, an AI Lab administrator. Symbolics recruited most of the remaining hackers including notable hacker Bill Gosper, who then left the AI Lab. Symbolics forced Greenblatt to also resign by citing MIT policies. While both companies delivered proprietary software, Stallman believed that LMI, unlike Symbolics, had tried to avoid hurting the lab's community. For two years, from 1982 to the end of 1983, Stallman worked by himself to clone the output of the Symbolics programmers, with the aim of preventing them from gaining a monopoly on the lab's computers.
Stallman argues that software users should have the freedom to share with their neighbor and to be able to study and make changes to the software that they use. He maintains that attempts by proprietary software vendors to prohibit these acts are antisocial and unethical.The phrase "software wants to be free" is often incorrectly attributed to him, and Stallman argues that this is a misstatement of his philosophy. He argues that freedom is vital for the sake of users and society as a moral value, and not merely for pragmatic reasons such as possibly developing technically superior software.
In February 1984, Stallman quit his job at MIT to work full-time on the GNU project, which he had announced in September 1983.

Syed Ashruf
AE09b025

Read more »

Information Panopticon & The Development and Convergence of ICTs in The Organization of Work

Abstract:
              I argue in this blog about Information Panopticon & the development and convergence of information and communication technologies(ICT),how its use in the organization of work as an example, is creating a global network of surveillance capabilities which affect the traveller. These surveillance capabilities are reminiscent of 18th century philosopher Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon, and as such the emerging global surveillance network has been referred to as the ‘travel panopticon’.

History of Information Panopticon – Some Important Aspects:           
            Jeremy Bentham was a philosopher and political radical who influenced the development of liberalism. Bentham was a significant figure in 19th century Anglo-American philosophy, but he is perhaps best known as an early advocate of utilitarianism. Indeed, his secretary and collaborator was James Mill, the father of John Stuart Mill—with whom utilitarianism is synonymous.
              Among Bentham’s insights and ideas was a plan for a multi-purpose disciplinary facility where the need for supervision was paramount. The primary function of the facility was as a prison or penitentiary, but Bentham thought the design equally applicable to schools, hospitals, ‘‘mad houses’’, and factories. In fact it was his brother Samuel’s efficient factory design which formed the basis for Bentham’s idea.

              The physical details of the panopticon are perhaps best given by paraphrasing Bentham himself: “The building is circular. The prisoners’ cells occupy the circumference, and are divided from each other to prevent all communication. The room for the inspector, or chief warden, occupies the centre of the building. Light is provided by a window in each cell, but the inspector’s room is designed in such a way that no direct light penetrates it from the perspective of the prisoners"
             This last point is crucial, as it enables the power of seeing without being seen—one of the essential ‘‘qualities’’ of the panopticon. As Bentham noted, this has the effect of creating the idea of surveillance in the prisoners’ minds and has the benefit that the inspector need not be in the central inspection room at all times. Such a quality of apparent omnipresent surveillance also has the consequence of creating a ‘‘chilling effect’’, where not only are the prisoners’ behaviours modified by the very course of incarceration, but that the prisoners also participate in their own self-modification. Michel Foucault wrote further on this in his work ‘Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison’, where he argued that invisible power gazes relentlessly upon society’s citizens, and puts them under such intense scrutiny that they become persuaded to participate in their own subjection.

ICTs - an Introduction:
              Information & Communication Technology usually called ICT, is often used as an extended synonym for information technology (IT) but is usually a more general term that stresses the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications  (telephone lines and wireless signals), intelligent building management systems and audio-visual systems in modern information technology.

Use of ICTs -  The Organization of Work & The Global Network of Surveillance:
              Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are reshaping many industries, often by reshaping how information is shared. Information-intensive industries, by their nature, show the greatest impacts due to ICTs that enable information sharing and the bypassing of traditional information intermediaries. However, while the effects and uses of ICT are often associated with organizations (and industries), their use occurs at the individual level. In other words, it is changes to individual work related to the use of ICTs that reshape both organization and industry structures, and viceversa.

              The now well established ICT paradigm is one based on developments in digital computing technologies combined  with advances in telecommunications capabilities. On top of this paradigm is emerging a whole range of new technological developments and applications—technologies which are enabling unprecedented convergence of hitherto disparate fields of human endeavour.  In particular, the convergence of these technologies is  having a profound effect on the policies and practices which nation states use for border control. This effect is transforming previously largely passive, incompatible, and primitive systems of border control into coordinated, sophisticated, and active systems of people tracking.This transformation has accelerated subsequent to the events in  the United States of September 11, 2001, and is resulting in the emergence of a seamless, ubiquitous, and continuous  form of travel surveillance.
              The travelling public are generally unaware of the scale, depth, or sophistication of this travel surveillance. They are also often unaware that they are under surveillance at all, let alone by whom they are being surveilled. Such surveillance characteristics are reminiscent of 18th century Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon, and as such the phenomenon of systematic global mass travel surveillance has been referred to as the travel panopticon.
              Bentham’s panopticon was an architectural plan intended (primarily) for a prison building where the prison’s guard could observe all prisoners, but where the prisoners could not see the guard. The travel panopticon has much of this same functionality, albeit in a more complex and multifaceted form. Its overall effect is one of ICT enabled surveillance of people movement on a massive and global scale as well as at increasingly fine levels of segmentation. The emergence of the travel panopticon raises profound ethical, political, and societal questions,—namely what effect is this emergence having on personal autonomy which is an essential part of any canonical account of moral philosophy, and it is also one of the most important elements in the political tradition of liberalism.
              On the other hand, these Trusted traveller’ or ‘fast track’ schemes such as Passenger data sharing agreements, Radio frequency identification (RFID- sensor and scanner technologies that use radio waves to identify people or objects automatically) etc., encourage the uptake in the use of biometrics and RFIDs with the promise of faster queuing times and reduced ‘hassle’ at airports.

Conclusion:
               In this post, I tried to argue of technology enabling the understanding and conveying of information expands in speed, efficiency and boundary-spanning daily. This, in turn, may throw entire industries into turmoil, some roles becoming redundant while completely new ones emerge. New approaches to work, knowledge, information, ICT and organization structure are essential prerequisites to survive in this new environment.  
              Common to all the ‘trusted traveller’ schemes mentioned above is their two level method of operation. Their ‘public face’ is the potential to reduce waiting times at airports and other border areas and to reduce the ‘hassle factor’ in negotiating the often long lines of people and myriad of forms necessary to enter or exit a country. These technological and informational practices have in turn been complimented by laws and international agreements diluting important aspects of human rights and human rights conventions. All of these initiatives have the potential in and of themselves to reduce personal autonomy, but it is in their combined application that the true surveillance capability of the travel panopticon is realised and the real consequences for personal autonomy and human dignity emerge.

References:
(i)  Wikipedia  - for getting some of the definitions of terms.
(ii)  Semple, J. (1993). ‘Bentham’s prison: A study of the panopticon penitentiary’. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
(iii) ‘Personal autonomy in the travel panopticon’ an article by Eamon Daly Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009.
(iv) ‘Dilemmas of Transformation in the Age of the Smart Machine’ by Shoshana ZuboJJ.

                                                                                                                                   Submitted by: Syed Ashruf,
                                                                                                                                                               AE09B025.

Read more »

"What is the Information Panopticon? Discussed with reference to the use of ICT in the organization of work since the 80's." – survellience state

Information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. It has originated from the term Panopticon, a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and social theorist

Jeremy Bentham.

The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the incarcerated being able to tell whether they are being watched. 

Within The Information Panopticon, Zuboff uses the architectural strategies of the panopticon as a metaphor to describe how information systems translate, record, and display human behavior. 

The information panopticon critiques how technological systems use transparency to assert power, control, and authority over us.

As these ICTs are introduced into the workplace, these information centers help managers to revamp their methods of communication, invite feedback, listen, coach, facilitate, manage many objectives, encourage autonomy, provide vision. In other words, technology can be used as a form of power that displays itself automatically and continuously.

Government is creating a surveillance state ?

In many developed countries the evidence is growing by the week that the government is creating a surveillance state.

It has a database containing the international travel records of all citizens.

In addition, the records of all children are to be held on, a national ID database is currently being developed, all health records currently held by GPs will be centrally available and a database of DNA profiles, ostensibly for criminals. 

Meanwhile, the ubiquitous CCTV cameras in every public space make personal privacy increasingly hard to maintain.

Even in the name of countering crime or combating terrorism, why should the state know where you are going, where you have been and whom you call while watching everyone’s movements on camera?

This is how the state(government) surrvillences its citizens.

Gokul

CH09B065

Read more »

Information Panopticon

The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham developed the original architecture of the panopitcon as a prison. The idea was that "total" surveillance would eventually eliminate undesired behaviour. While Bentham's idea was literal, it has since become a metaphor for any type of system in which surveillance can or is total. The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. The combination of information and communication technology used in call centres means it is possible for managers to monitor remotely worker performance and productivity, embodying the themes of panopticon control and surveillance. This monitoring ranges from keystroke counting, telephone service observation whereby statistics are gathered on the duration, time between, and number of calls, telephone call accounting, "peeking" on to workers computer screens and into electronic mail, to the use of "active" or "magic" badges that can keep track of an employee's movements and locations. Increasingly, computers are being used to set tasks and performances for all levels of worker.The responsibility of this technical authority does begin to question what ethical, social, and professional surveillance is acceptable in response to ICT technology in the workplace. Surveillance in the work place is not necessarily new; it has long been around in the form of corporate policy, collective behavior and social traditions. Zuboff describes how maintaining faith that under girds imperative control is hard work psychologically demanding, time-consuming, and inevitably prone to ambiguity (Zuboff 360). The capacity of these surveillance systems will accomplish some goals, and create entirely new unresolved problems: what to do with all of this personal data? Similar to the Panoptic prison, the information panopticon does focus on creating a vulnerable, defenseless user. However, the employees are not prisoners, they are not without some sense of control, and certainly should question the business practices. The fight remains within the users, the employees, to not passively participate in surveillance but rather to actively place responsibility on management and administration to effectively organize. As ICTs continue to act as control mechanisms within the workplace, management should tirelessly redevelop systems that respond not only to power but also the emotional, the personal, and complexity of human behaviors.Today, close to a billion workers are surveilled electronically in workplaces all over the world. Management often views surveillance as an attempt to achieve certain organizational goals better by more fully utilizing time and other resources. But from the employees’ perspective, surveillance can also be understood as an attempt to create new power relationships based on an electronic version of Bentham's panopticon. 

- N.HARDEV
CH09B066

Read more »

Information Panopticon

At the end of World War II, the electronic digital computer technology we take for granted today was still in its earliest infancy. It was expensive, failureprone,and ill-understood. Digital computers were seen as calculators, useful primarily for accounting and advanced scientific research.The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham developed the original architecture of the panopitcon as a prison. Be it a personal computer or a database system, both promote forms of interconnectivity that require a centralized control centre. The physical location of this centre is analogous to the central surveillance tower of the panopticon .  As these ICTs are introduced into the workplace, these information centers help managers to revamp their methods of communication, invite feedback, listen, coach, facilitate, manage many objectives, encourage autonomy, provide vision. In other words, technology can be used as a form of power that displays itself automatically and continuously.This places the employees in a position of passive and obedient, where they no longer know or understand exactly how panoptic power is being enforced. Consequently, the administrative actions within the workplace can appear paranoid and non-specified approaches to security.The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham developed the original architecture of the panopitcon as a prison. The responsibility of this technical authority does begin to question what ethical, social, and professional surveillance is acceptable in response to ICT technology in the workplace. Surveillance in the work place is not necessarily new; it has long been around in the form of corporate policy, collective behavior and social traditions. Zuboff describes how maintaining faith that under girds imperative control is hard work psychologically demanding, time-consuming, and inevitably prone to ambiguity (Zuboff 360). The capacity of these surveillance systems will accomplish some goals, and create entirely new unresolved problems: what to do with all of this personal data? Similar to the Panoptic prison, the information panopticon does focus on creating a vulnerable, defenseless user. However, the employees are not prisoners, they are not without some sense of control, and certainly should question the business practices. The fight remains within the users, the employees, to not passively participate in surveillance but rather to actively place responsibility on management and administration to effectively organize. As ICTs continue to act as control mechanisms within the workplace, management should tirelessly redevelop systems that respond not only to power but also the emotional, the personal, and complexity of human behaviors.

-

R.SURENDER NAIK

CH09B071

Read more »

"What is the Information Panopticon? Explain with reference to the use of ICT in the organization of work since the 80's."

ABSTRACT:

This article Discuses about Information Panopticon and enhances the knowledge by taking the example of surveillance of speeding vehicles by using of cameras by the police.

INTRODUCTION:

The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms

HISTORY:

Prisons were the nucleus of the present surveillance system. Prisons were built to confine “criminals” which were defined by their judiciary. These prisoners should be under scan every time,so surveillance was inevitable. Also to remove the dishonesty, idleness of human agents, the surveillance has even entered industries. Slowly it had entered “Discipline” needed educational institutions. Surveillance now have even entered reality shows for fun (Big Brother/Big Boss are shows where live in a house with no connection to the outside and surveillance is done by CCTV) .But the Surveillance technique can be used for something very important like preventing crime.

INFORMATION PANOPTICON:

The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham developed the original architecture of the panopitcon as a prison. The structure consisted of a centralized tower surrounded by a circular building divided into prison cells. Benthams concept was to maximize the number of prisoners that can be observed by one individual within the tower. Within The Information Panopticon, Zuboff uses the architectural strategies of the panopticon as a metaphor to describe how information systems translate, record, and display human behaviorwith a degree of illumation that would have exceeded even Benthams most outlandish fantasies. The information panopticon critiques how technological systems use transparency to assert power, control, and authority over users.

Inherent within many new technological and informational devices is the ability to network. Whether it is a personal computer or database systems, these applications often promote forms of interconnectivity that require a centralized control center . In early telecommunication experiments by inventors like Alexander Bell and Samuel Morse, the idea of transmission was essentially linear. A message was sent from one location to another, traveling down a wire. As innovation progressed, communication began to operate through various access nodes within a network. The physical locations of the switching and control centers began to operate in very similar ways to the central surveillance tower of the panopticon.

As these ICTs are introduced into the workplace, managers and employees are discovering the hierarchical risks within information authority. Zuboff explains that these information centers help managers in a workplace to revamp their methods of communication, invite feedback, listen, coach, facilitate, manage many objectives, encourage autonomy, provide vision .The engagements a manager previously dealt with in a face-to-face setting can now be administered through a system that operates in a ubiquitous way. In other words, technology can be used as a form of power that displays itself automatically and continuously

In a work setting, this method of control is different to that of the original panopticon because many ICT systems function as transparent architectures. The technological knowledge needed to understand how one is being surveyed is not as apparent as in Benthams prison. The techniques of control within informational and networked systems often appear pragmatic, immediate, and technical .This places the employees in a position of passive and obedient, where they no longer know or understand exactly how panoptic power is being enforced. Consequently, the administrative actions within the workplace can appear paranoid and non-specified approaches to security.

The responsibility of this technical authority does begin to question what ethical, social, and professional surveillance is acceptable in response to ICT technology in the workplace. Surveillance in the work place is not necessarily new; it has long been around in the form of corporate policy, collective behavior and social traditions. Zuboff describes how maintaining faith that undergirds imperative control is hard work psychologically demanding, time-consuming, and inevitably prone to ambiguity. The capacity of these surveillance systems will accomplish some goals, and create entirely new unresolved problems: what to do with all of this personal data? Similar to the Panoptic prison, the information panopticon does focus on creating a vulnerable, defenseless user. However, the employees are not prisoners, they are not without some sense of control, and certainly should question the business practices. The fight remains within the users, the employees, to not passively participate in surveillance but rather to actively place responsibility on management and administration to effectively organize. As ICTs continue to act as control mechanisms within the workplace, management should tirelessly redevelop systems that respond not only to power but also the emotional, the personal, and complexity of human behaviors.

EXAMPLE OF CAMERAS FOR SPEED CONTROL

Computering is used in speed cameras detecting the speed of a vehicle
it is either done by sending a laser or radar beam at the passing vehicle. The beam is then returned back to the speed camera equipment, providing an exact speed or by using loops in the road, if the passing vehicle drives too fast over the loops, the speed camera is triggered.
All methods involve technology and help the police force give speeding tickets to the people who have broken the speeding limit law.By the use of these cameras it is helping drivers realise they must slow down or their driving licenses will be taken, they will recieve points on their licence or they will recieve a fine which all helps decrease the chances of the speeding limit laws being broken.

BOTTOM LINE

Speed cameras mainly have benefits (catching speeding vehicles therefore reducing the number of people speeding in the future). This system helps the police because “we can observe more number of people at the same time and can punish more no.of law breakers” which was the priniciple or Jeremy Bentham’s architecture of prison to view more no.of prisoners by one observer and help police to “DOMINATE ” by making public’s traffic transparent by using cameras

B.Vamshi
EE09B104

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison

Read more »

Risks and Responsibilities

   Whirlwind, under the direction of engineer Jay Forrester, actually began in 1944 as an analog computer for use in a flight simulator, funded by the Navy. News about the ENIAC and EDVAC digital computer projects led Forrester to abandon the analog approach in early 1946.But the original application goal of a flight simulator remained.In theory flight simulators were, and remain, what is known as a “dual-use” technology, equally useful for training military and civilian pilots.It is important to emphasize that at this historical juncture these were not obvious goals for a digital computer. Analog computers and control mechanisms(servomechanisms) were well-developed, with sophisticated theoretical underpinnings. (Indeed, Forrester began his work at MIT as a graduate student in Gordon Brown’s Servomechanisms Laboratory.) Analog controllers did not require the then-complex additional step of converting sensor readings into numerical form and control instructions into waveforms or other analog signals (Valley 1985).  Mechanical or electro-mechanical devices were inherently  slower than electronic ones, but there was no inherent reason why electronic computers or controllers should be digital, since many electronic components have analog properties. Numerous electronic analog computers were built duringand after the war. Most other projects saw electronic digital computers as essentially giant calculators, primarily useful for scientific computation. Their size, their expense, and this vision of their function led many to believe that once perfected only a few — perhaps only a couple — of digital computers would ever be needed.  Even Forrester at one time apparently thought that the entire country would eventually be served by a single gigantic computer.In the contemporary context  , the alarm warning systems for missile poses a lot of risks for the world . the greatest risk is when the system gives false alarm and thus may lead to more misunderstanding and war . In 1983 ,Lt. Colenel Stanislav Petrov was the officer incharge of the warning system monitoring station outside Moscow for Soviet Union . One fine warning he got signals indicating 5 ballistic missiles have been launched by US .The tensions between the states was already present and this false alarm could have resulted in a war .Petrov thought that had America launched a nuclear attack against Russia ,missiles would have been raining down not just 5 thus considered that it is a false signal ,thus saving the world of another devastating war .The Whirlwind computers developed during cold war is a classic example o risk involved in any systems The duplex computer enables us to keep the data safe even if one of the computers gets damaged or destroyed the other can take over . this kind of computer systems is used in banks all across the globe .

    Therefore we can say that technology is directly proportional to the risk.

-

R.SURENDER NAIK

CH09B071

Read more »

Need of National Security during the Cold War period - Risks & Responsibilities with the Space Race

INTRODUCTION:

Computers were used for various operations in terms of extensive calculations (incybernics) during World-War 2, and US became the super power by this very idea of anti-aircraft weaponry and artillery after the World War 2

CLOSED WORLD DISCOURSES & CYBORG’S DISCOURSES:

After World War 2 there created a closed world which was like putting every thought, word and action into reaching a central goal, which was regarding the national security during the cold war period.

Cold War was referred to as the period after the World War 2 which was a silent conflict between the US and USSR regarding the military and the technology and science that determined their supremacy over the nations.

During this very period, digital computers were developed and were extensively used for the fast calculations of ballistics employed in anti-aircrafts weaponry and also for a wide and over-all surveillance of the nation which was considered very necessary during this time as a concern of national security.

SPACE RACE – RISKS &RESPONSIBILITIES:

              In one of the silent conflicts during Cold War the Space Race between US and USSR which referred to as the race or fight between these countries for the ultimate supremacy over the outer space exploration which was regarded as a great threat to the national security.

              The other reason for this very fight was the reputation one might get if one win the race over the other which dealt with the altitude of the US then.

So, the risks involved during this research were also of concern because in this very fight between the nations, they were fast enough to produce space vehicles but lacked efficiency and safety of the people concerned to travel in these vehicles.

This means they neglected the danger involved in such actions as getting the best technology was the only concern in this race. Because of this there were many accidents of space vehicles like Appolo 1

CONCLUSION:

              Even though this space race was a responsibility towards the national security and also an action to get supremacy to the nations they were not concerned about the responsibility towards the people life in this very race and the risks involved was not given preference.

              The reason for not considering the risk can be attributed to the giving much preference to national security, patriotism.

                                                                                                                                    Submitted by: Syed Ashruf,
                                                                                                                                                                              AE09B025.

Read more »

The development and further research on computer was associated with perceived need of national security during the cold war. Discussed with contemporary example of cyber war - hacking – wikileaks.

After world war II there was a period of tension, proxy wars between the new superpowers of the world.  During this period one has to keep eye on the other in order to be alert and secured and be prepared for whatever the comes.

With the development in aircraft and submarines, an attack was possible through any way.  The radars, tracking devices, warning system were installed all over these countries to keep an eye on possibility of an enemy attack. All these system generated lots of data which need it be viewed and analyzed.  The human computers were not capable of handling these huge amount of data. So some one came up with ideas handling these data with a mechanical/digital computer.

We clearly see that SAGE project which needed analysis of data and ballistic calculations which were done by a twin computer working in tandem, to do these calculations. This made calculations easy and hence gave a upper hand to America in defense system. After the was depended on the so called digital computers.

People began to make smarter and smarter computers to strengthen their defense.

In the modern digital world computer performs lots of other work but we have to remember that these were developed as a part of defense system.

In modern times all this data from part another part travels through wire – i.e. Internet.  This has made lives of many easier,  the banks and cooperate sectors have gone through a tremendous change these years .’ who would thought of a idea of wired cash I 1900?’

But we should not forget to the dark side or the risk involved in it.  All the data sent through this networks are they secure?  The answer is ‘no’ . there is risk at the data sent over a network can be interrupted by other person and taken advantages.

Here comes the role of a hacker. Hacker is a person with high knowledge and knows the backdoors of a network.

This type of hacker in to others system/network and getting benefited by their data is very common.

The recent popular wikileaks hacked the cables sent by US diplomats to Washington.  And release these cables created huge tension among nations.

There is another kind of hacking groups who call themselves cybersoilders. The hack in to other countries important websites and important data bases.

Such as the defense, nuclear reactor system.

These cyber war among counties have been there for few years with growing no of computers a cyber waR on a country can destabilize their economy , defense system etc.

Recently a group called Indian cyber army hacked in to Pakistan defense and ministry websites as a reaction for Mumbai attack. The Pakistan cyber army pakbugs attacked back CBI websites.

With these type of cyber  war the countries have improve not only their defense but also the computers and database security.


Gokul Krishna 
CH09B065

Read more »

Risks and Responsibilities in ATC

The development and further research on Computers was associated with the perceived need of national security during the Cold War period.
Discuss, with contemporary examples some of the risks and responsibilities involved with such justifications.

After the World War II, USA and Russia raised as the new Super Powers and in the name of National Security conducted further research
in the field of science, and created many weapons, thus raising the tensions between the two countries resulting in Cold War.

As a result, America invented the SAGE system,which detects any hostile aircrafts in the borders of the nation and immediately able
to send recruits to counter them.All this was done by the use of double-computers,the other one is used for backup in the case where
one computer fails.This system is the first one of its kind.Military Personnel will constantly observe the skies on their respective
screens and detects any unauthorised aircraft flowing in the air, by some sort of code.
Vannevar Bush says that -
"This war emphasizes three facts of supreme importance to national security: (1) Powerful new tactics of defense and offense are developed around new weapons created
by scientific and engineering research... (3) war is increasingly total war, in which the armed services must be supplemented by active participation of every
element of civilian population. To insure continued preparedness along farsighted technical lines, the research scientists of the country must be called upon to
continued in peacetime some substantial portion of those types of contribution to national security which they have made so effectively during the stress of the
present war (Bush 1945, p. 12)".

One contemporary example of such sort would be the Air Traffic Control System stationed at every country's airports(usually),some
countries even use the system for defense purposes like the SAGE system.
Air traffic control (ATC) is a service provided by ground-based controllers who direct aircraft on the ground and in the air. The primary purpose of ATC systems
worldwide is to separate aircraft to prevent collisions, to organize and expedite the flow of traffic, and to provide information and other support for pilots
whenever able.
Preventing collisions is referred to as separation, which is a term used to prevent aircraft from coming too close to each other by use of lateral, vertical and
longitudinal separation minima; many aircraft now have collision avoidance systems installed to act as a backup to ATC observation and instructions. In addition to
its primary function, the ATC can provide additional services such as providing information to pilots, weather and navigation information and NOTAMs (NOtices To
AirMen).
The primary method of controlling the immediate airport environment is visual observation from the airport traffic control tower (ATCT). The ATCT is a tall, windowed structure located on the airport grounds. Aerodrome or Tower controllers are responsible for the separation and efficient movement of aircraft and vehicles operating on the taxiways and runways of the airport itself, and aircraft in the air near the airport
The areas of responsibility for ATCT controllers fall into three general operational disciplines; Local Control or Air Control, Ground Control, and Flight Data/Clearance Delivery
is responsible for the airport "movement" areas, as well as areas not released to the airlines or other users. This generally includes all taxiways, inactive runways, holding areas, and some transitional aprons or intersections where aircraft arrive, having vacated the runway or departure gate. Exact areas and control responsibilities are clearly defined in local documents and agreements at each airport. Any aircraft, vehicle, or person walking or working in these areas is required to have clearance from Ground Control. This is normally done via VHF/UHF radio, but there may be special cases where other processes are used. Most aircraft and airside vehicles have radios. Aircraft or vehicles without radios must respond to ATC instructions via aviation light signals or else be led by vehicles with radios. People working on the airport surface normally have a communications link through which they can communicate with Ground Control, commonly either by handheld radio or even cell phone. Ground Control is vital to the smooth operation of the airport, because this position impacts the sequencing of departure aircraft, affecting the safety and efficiency of the airport's operation.
Some busier airports have Surface Movement Radar (SMR), such as, ASDE-3, AMASS or ASDE-X, designed to display aircraft and vehicles on the ground. These are used by Ground Control as an additional tool to control ground traffic, particularly at night or in poor visibility. There are a wide range of capabilities on these systems as they are being modernized. Older systems will display a map of the airport and the target. Newer systems include the capability to display higher quality mapping, radar target, data blocks, and safety alerts, and to interface with other systems such as digital flight strips
Risks involved:
1.Traffic:Several factors dictate the amount of traffic that can land at an airport in a given amount of time. Each landing aircraft must touch down, slow, and exit the runway before the next crosses the approach end of the runway. This process requires at least one and up to four minutes for each aircraft. Allowing for departures between arrivals, each runway can thus handle about 30 arrivals per hour.
Problems begin when airlines schedule more arrivals into an airport than can be physically handled, or when delays elsewhere cause groups of aircraft that would otherwise be separated in time to arrive simultaneously. Aircraft must then be delayed in the air by holding over specified locations until they may be safely sequenced to the runway. Up until the 1990s, holding, which has significant environmental and cost implications, was a routine occurrence at many airports.
2.Weather:Rain, ice or snow on the runway cause landing aircraft to take longer to slow and exit, thus reducing the safe arrival rate and requiring more space between landing aircraft. Fog also requires a decrease in the landing rate. These, in turn, increase airborne delay for holding aircraft. If more aircraft are scheduled than can be safely and efficiently held in the air, a ground delay program may be established, delaying aircraft on the ground before departure due to conditions at the arrival airport.
Inspite of all these, in the case where all of the options disappear,the sole burden of carrying the passengers safely to their destination rests on the pilot alone.Thus,the personnel,and the pilot,mostly should act with responsibility 

G.Abhilash Roy,
CS09B012.

Read more »