
The return of the Luddite president - danso
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/luddite-president-clinton-trump-technology-226454
======
mtviewdave
_The tech-aloofness of the two nominees marks a sharp break from President
Barack Obama, who fought to keep a mobile phone when he entered the White
House..._

It was Clinton's desire to do the same thing that led to her setting up her
own email server and the resulting scandal.

 _Clinton also balked at agency guidance that she use a government-issued
personal computer in her Foggy Bottom office_

Obama wanted to use a mobile device instead of a desktop computer for email,
and that proves that's he's tech-savvy, but Clinton desire for the same thing
means she's a luddite?

~~~
ArkyBeagle
I interpret this more as - government IT is in terrible shape, and I can't
blame somebody who does not wish to be saddled with the pain of it.

The argument that an ostensibly political appointee must be held to the same
IT-savviness standards as , say, an enlisted (wo)man are specious. While it
would be a good thing if it were true, we all know too many people in
positions of power who have simply not had the time to be competent in it.
It's a variation on the generally advancing Russian Doll thinking that is
sweeping tech.

~~~
Turing_Machine
"The argument that an ostensibly political appointee must be held to the same
IT-savviness standards as , say, an enlisted (wo)man are specious."

Wait: you are seriously arguing that the Secretary of State of the United
States is in a less-sensitive position than an enlisted member of the armed
forces? Seriously?

~~~
ArkyBeagle
I am saying that detailed crypto and IT knowledge is not a prerequisite for
being appointed to a cabinet position.

Ever do any work for lawyers? It's like that. They have admins that run the
firms; the lawyers are the inventory.

~~~
Turing_Machine
However, being able to hire competent employees _is_ (or should be) a
prerequisite for any executive position.

Also, it doesn't take "detailed crypto and IT knowledge" to know that sending
sensitive material over email is a bad idea.

------
sheraz
The article title seems a bit unfair, especially given how well trump has
played in social media and the ever changing "news feed."

Just because people are printing news articles does not make them a Luddite. I
imagine many broadcasters still work this way.

Lastly, it is not trumps or hillarys personal responsibility to understand
email, networks, or even the governance of it all. It is their duty to fill
their cabinet with the right people who can translate translate all the
complexity into actionable choices and provide guidance. Same with CEOs

~~~
danso
To be fair, the problem goes beyond just wanting to print a web article:

> _Clinton, now 68, also emailed a department staffer to ask what time the CBS
> drama “The Good Wife” aired and later to request a paper copy of a website
> news item. “Pls print for me and deliver to me,” Clinton wrote in the winter
> of 2013, attaching a web address. “This links to the front page of the
> Washington Post,” the employee responded. “Is there a particular article
> that you are looking for?”_

Assuming Secretary Clinton wasn't trying to solely keep her email private, the
kind of unfamilarity she has with the very fundamentals of information
technology is the kind of unfamiliarity that leads to flawed usage of
technology, such as her now-controversial email server. When you need so many
middlemen to get you information that you could far more asily access and
explore yourself, you increase the chance of incompetency and inefficency
hindering the information flow.

~~~
sheraz
Disagree here. This is what the right hand man/woman is for.

My guess is that there is a real cultural problem not only in the Democratic
Party but also with hillarys organization(s). Dissent and speaking truth to
power is squelched which creates hubris and bad decisions.

Certainly there were people who told Hillary it was a bad idea to put an email
server in a basement. Were they heard? Did they even speak up?

------
blatherard
The title of this article has little to do with the content. Luddism isn't
ignorance of technology, it is fear of and hostility toward it. This is just
an article about how Clinton and Trump don't use technology as much or in the
same way as your average post-Boomer office worker, but says nothing about
hostility toward it.

------
kristopolous
Ok, yes. Politicians live under a rock on a different planet. We all know
this. :-(

It's definitely not an age thing though ... I see plenty of people in their
golden years on smartphones and have quite a few facebook friends north of 80
who post frequently and clearly understand the basic tenants of the things.

~~~
johansch
I guess we all at least know that Hillary likes email.

~~~
johansch
This was downvoted? I provided a pertinent fact - Hillary does use email.

------
ageek123
I don't care whether the President uses email or knows how to tweet. I care
about whether their policies are pro-tech or anti-tech, and right now the two
parties are in a race to the bottom to be as anti-tech as possible.

~~~
mbesto
I think the point is that it would be a fairly logical to conclude that if he
"doesn't believe in email", he's going to have a very hard time understanding
the implications of net neutrality, IP rights, and more.

~~~
jackpirate
When cs giants like Donald Knuth also "don't believe in email" I find this
line of reasoning specious.

~~~
emdd
That's a fair argument. However, the _reason_ behind Knuth's conclusions are
inevitably different than Trump's. So, I think it shouldn't be compared.

------
jstalin
If I were a candidate for president, I wouldn't use email either. It's a
political and security risk.

~~~
remarkEon
It appears the argument being made here in the article is not that Clinton and
Trump are tech averse because of political and security risks, but that they
are themselves technologically inept.

