Internet Histories Digital Technology, Culture and Society ISSN: 2470-1475 (Print) 2470-1483 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rint20 From closed world discourse to digital utopianism: the changing face of responsible computing at Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (1981–1992) Megan Finn & Quinn DuPont To cite this article: Megan Finn & Quinn DuPont (2020) From closed world discourse to digital utopianism: the changing face of responsible computing at Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (1981–1992), Internet Histories, 4:1, 6-31, DOI: 10.1080/24701475.2020.1725851 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2020.1725851 © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 02 Mar 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1553 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rint20 INTERNET HISTORIES 2020, VOL. 4, NO. 1, 6–31 https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2020.1725851 From closed world discourse to digital utopianism: the changing face of responsible computing at Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (1981–1992) Megan Finna and Quinn DuPontb aUniversity of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA; bUniversity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) began in Received 22 August 2019 1981 as a group of computer scientists concerned about nuclear Revised 28 January 2020 destruction. Early CPSR members analysed military planning docu- Accepted 29 January 2020 ments and levelled technical critiques at how computers were to KEYWORDS be used in battle, highlighting the limits of computing technolo- civil liberties; computers gies. Although early CPSR arguments were primarily technical, as and war; pre-Internet responsible professionals their practices were based on a collect- history; responsible ive morality and a willingness to question their profession’seco- computing; technology nomic self-interest. As the Cold War thawed in 1989, CPSR met a activism; values series of challenges, including financial issues, leadership turnover, in computing and a changing and expanding role for information technology. CPSR emerged from this crisis with a renewed focus on “civil lib- erties” that was largely underwritten by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Although CPSR’s civil liberties advocacy sometimes retained its early arguments and practices by addressing the limi- tations of information technologies, they also adopted the emerg- ing views of Silicon Valley’s “digital utopianism,” advocating for the growth of information technology. We describe this seemingly contradictory shift in responsibility along three axes: the use of standpoint epistemology for responsible computing, a transition from professional choice to lobbying, and a transition from sub- stantivism to instrumentalism. In this paper, we characterize an important instance of collective responsibility for computing by tracing the evolution of CPSR’s first decade of practices, techni- ques, and arguments with an eye towards the challenges of responsible computing today. Debating the ethical use and responsible development of computing technologies is an evergreen concern that has intensified in recent years. With IT workers’ renewed political consciousness, these technologies have taken on new meaning and import- ance. Political activism in computing communities today animates a broad range of topics, technologies, ideologies, and institutions. The so-called “techlash” includes the CONTACT Megan Finn [email protected] University of Washington Information School, Mary Gates Hall, 1851 NE Grant Ln, Seattle, WA 98105, USA ß 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. INTERNET HISTORIES 7 Tech Workers Coalition, employee protests for safe workplaces at Google, activist organizations such as AI Now Institute, and political debates about the spread of “fake news.” In this article we draw attention to the resurgence of interest in “responsible computing” and contextualise it historically through a case study of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CSPR), a professional group that sought to shape the future of computing through moral principles and values. CPSR began in 1981, lasted for over 30 years, and spun off many of today’s leading Internet watchdog and activist groups. While mostly focused in the United States, CPSR’s extensive reach and decentralised, chapter-driven work agenda nonetheless meant that the organization addressed a wide-ranging set of concerns with global impact. This history has important lessons for the subsequent development of network and computer technologies by illuminating the origins of some of the ongoing debates and struggles for technology’s responsible use and development. We enter into the responsible computing debate by uncovering and highlighting an organization that spans the formative years of the Internet, provides evidence of early activist and reform efforts, and therefore offers a source of reflection for politics today. We identify organizational changes in the context of broader social changes and new technological issues. We found that CPSR marshalled technical and political values to shape our contemporary understanding of responsible computing. Using archival materials from the Charles Babbage Institute and the Stanford University Archives, as well as published and new oral histories with seven key figures of CPSR from its fertile early and middle periods (1981-1992),1 we highlight how the organization’s social and political reforms drew on notions of responsibility. We focus on CPSR’s advocacy practices and its articulations of principles and found evidence of “responsible” professional activity operating in the context of changing social values in a capitalist and technologically organized society. During this period, CPSR often led the development of responsible computing but has seldom been acknowledged as an important actor. Despite its positive influence, CPSR also failed to recognize and resist broader moral transformations that were underway and through its practices, the organization was an active participant in the shift from “the closed world” (Edwards, 1997)to“the rise of digital utopianism” (Turner, 2006). We analyse transformations in responsibility within CPSR during the height of its influence. Originally, CPSR sought to limit the development of computers for nuclear and AI-enabled weapons systems. Later, social, political, and technological changes along with shifts in organization membership caused CPSR and its allies to advocate for the expansion of computing technologies. One of those issues, privacy and surveil- lance, emerged as a potent concern. Throughout this transformation, responsible com- puting remained CPSR’s raison d’etre:^ it educated the public and government about the risks of computing technologies even as the substance of its moral claims changed dramatically over time. We characterize this transformation as an evolution of practices that constitute a new kind of responsible computing. CPSR members were originally motivated by pro- fessional choice, but later became motivated by political action. Once CPSR became active in direct lobbying and political persuasion, CPSR’s activism changed. While the organization grew in power, the epistemic standpoint that both motivated and limited 8 M. FINN AND Q. DUPONT its duty of responsibility was replaced by emergent technocratic powers. The trans- formation from peaceniks to technocrats links Edwards’ and Turner’s theses—from closed world discourse to digital utopianism—but does not explain the connection. Thus, we turn to Andrew Feenberg’s schema of technology (1999) and find that CPSR practices shifted from substantivism to instrumentalism. Early members of CPSR railed against a dangerous closed world by describing how technical means are linked to risky ends in complex military computing systems. Once CPSR became a technocratic actor, however, their previously sceptical views about technology transformed into a liberal faith in its progress. We conclude by offering lessons for today drawn from CPSR’s history. Resisting closed world logics CPSR emerged out of concerns about computer-aided nuclear war. In 1981, the US government was deep in the Cold War. Initially, a small group of computer professio- nals at Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) raised concerns about computer-aided nuclear war on an internal mailing list. Nearby computer professionals and Stanford researchers joined the discussion and the nascent CPSR formed. Soon after, the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was announced in 1983. The SDI aimed to fund novel science and engineering techniques, including advances in computing, to develop automatic defences against Soviet missile attacks. CPSR described SDI as “an armed early warning system … [that] would respond instantly to attack, intercepting missiles in space” (CPSR Speakers Bureau Speaker