Between 1959 and 1989, Soviet scientists and officials made numerous attempts to network their nation—to construct a nationwide computer network. None of these attempts succeeded, and the enterprise had been abandoned by the time the Soviet Union fell apart. Meanwhile, ARPANET, the American precursor to the Internet, went online in 1969. Why did the Soviet network, with top-level scientists and patriotic incentives, fail while the American network succeeded? In How Not to Network a Nation, Benjamin Peters reverses the usual cold war dualities and argues that the American ARPANET took shape thanks to well-managed state subsidies and collaborative research environments and the Soviet network projects stumbled because of unregulated competition among self-interested institutions, bureaucrats, and others. The capitalists behaved like socialists while the socialists behaved like capitalists.
After examining the midcentury rise of cybernetics, the science of self-governing systems, and the emergence in the Soviet Union of economic cybernetics, Peters complicates this uneasy role reversal while chronicling the various Soviet attempts to build a “unified information network.” Drawing on previously unknown archival and historical materials, he focuses on the final, and most ambitious of these projects, the All-State Automated System of Management (OGAS), and its principal promoter, Viktor M. Glushkov. Peters describes the rise and fall of OGAS—its theoretical and practical reach, its vision of a national economy managed by network, the bureaucratic obstacles it encountered, and the institutional stalemate that killed it. Finally, he considers the implications of the Soviet experience for today’s networked world.
Endorsements
“Benjamin Peters’s book is not only a scintillating explanation of why the Soviet Internet failed to materialize but also a first-rate sociopolitical investigative report and a delicious tale of how Soviet efforts to manage a command economy left them without either command or an economy.”
—Todd Gitlin, Professor and Chair, PhD Program in Communications, Columbia University; author of Media Unlimited: How the Torrent of Images and Sounds Overwhelms Our Lives
“Peters offers a compelling account of the Soviet Union’s failed attempts to construct their own Internet during the Cold War period. How Not to Network a Nation fills an important gap in the Internet’s history, highlighting the ways in which generativity and openness have been essential to networked innovation.”
—Jonathan Zittrain, Professor of Law and Computer Science, Harvard University; Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
“As early as 1962, cybernetics experts in the Soviet Union proposed a complex, large-scale computer network. It fit with a socialist vision but not with bureaucratic politics and a faltering command economy. It was never realized, but the story sheds light both on Soviet history and on the social conditions that shape computing and communications networks. It is a previously unknown story, now elegantly told by Benjamin Peters together with a thoughtful analysis that makes the early history of computing seem full of possibilities not obvious.”
—Craig Calhoun, FBA, Director and President, London School of Economics and Political Science
Awards
Honorable Mention, 2017 PROSE Awards, History of Science, Medicine and Technology category
5 有用 维Cc 2020-01-05 14:48:15
结论:美国互联网不是市场的内生结果,而是国家规划的结果。苏联没有发展出互利网的原因恰恰是因为国家控制/能力不够,而不是相反。另外今日八卦:此Peters是John Peters的儿子...
1 有用 Caleb 2023-10-18 10:26:34 北京
集中力量办大事,最大优势也可能面临内部挑战,特别是非正式的administrative dynamics。上面能拍板的两个leader没有去参加审议委员会,可能是造化弄人,但也可能是有意为之。需要注意,跟一般基础科研项目不一样,OGAS不是单纯的技术研发,无论是不是自下而上,都有改变经济体制和管理方式的内涵,自然也容易触动更多利益。另外,作者是不是对aparnet太乐观了,美国也有bureaucr... 集中力量办大事,最大优势也可能面临内部挑战,特别是非正式的administrative dynamics。上面能拍板的两个leader没有去参加审议委员会,可能是造化弄人,但也可能是有意为之。需要注意,跟一般基础科研项目不一样,OGAS不是单纯的技术研发,无论是不是自下而上,都有改变经济体制和管理方式的内涵,自然也容易触动更多利益。另外,作者是不是对aparnet太乐观了,美国也有bureaucracy啊。 (展开)
1 有用 eGKt4BXa 2019-03-23 20:03:13
MIT press果然偏重技术解读。作者不想用庸俗的辉格解释来解释苏联互联网计划的失败,即苏联缺乏自由价值观。那么就要关注技术细节,然而技术谈到最后也不会止步于技术。互联网不是一个事物,而是许多事物,好事物,坏事物与坏事物,但总归是不能没有。
1 有用 伊万妮亚快跑 2020-05-19 04:36:35
对于我来说, 这本书给了一个启发, 怎么从国家的角度来看cybernetic system的历史, 这种技术如何被computer science系的学生思考, 但最终却因为管理者和从业者知识上的差异, 前者只是知道政治上的implication而不知道affordance, 后者只是知道如何afford而不知道后果, 这个技术最终形成了一个极其centralised的信息系统. 对于西方国家来说... 对于我来说, 这本书给了一个启发, 怎么从国家的角度来看cybernetic system的历史, 这种技术如何被computer science系的学生思考, 但最终却因为管理者和从业者知识上的差异, 前者只是知道政治上的implication而不知道affordance, 后者只是知道如何afford而不知道后果, 这个技术最终形成了一个极其centralised的信息系统. 对于西方国家来说, 这本书是一个背面的红灯: 要往那个方向的反方向快速驶去. (展开)
0 有用 Alan 2023-04-16 13:39:12 墨西哥
苏联如何(无法)建立互联网体系的一种解释:互联网这一基础设施的想象和构造无法外在于国家的官僚层级和资源分配体系之外,两者的纠缠和牵制揭露出“技术-社会-政治”的nexus——这符合“对称分析”或者“谱系学”的原则,关注技术如何失败,或失败的技术对我们有何启发。
1 有用 Caleb 2023-10-18 10:26:34 北京
集中力量办大事,最大优势也可能面临内部挑战,特别是非正式的administrative dynamics。上面能拍板的两个leader没有去参加审议委员会,可能是造化弄人,但也可能是有意为之。需要注意,跟一般基础科研项目不一样,OGAS不是单纯的技术研发,无论是不是自下而上,都有改变经济体制和管理方式的内涵,自然也容易触动更多利益。另外,作者是不是对aparnet太乐观了,美国也有bureaucr... 集中力量办大事,最大优势也可能面临内部挑战,特别是非正式的administrative dynamics。上面能拍板的两个leader没有去参加审议委员会,可能是造化弄人,但也可能是有意为之。需要注意,跟一般基础科研项目不一样,OGAS不是单纯的技术研发,无论是不是自下而上,都有改变经济体制和管理方式的内涵,自然也容易触动更多利益。另外,作者是不是对aparnet太乐观了,美国也有bureaucracy啊。 (展开)
0 有用 Alan 2023-04-16 13:39:12 墨西哥
苏联如何(无法)建立互联网体系的一种解释:互联网这一基础设施的想象和构造无法外在于国家的官僚层级和资源分配体系之外,两者的纠缠和牵制揭露出“技术-社会-政治”的nexus——这符合“对称分析”或者“谱系学”的原则,关注技术如何失败,或失败的技术对我们有何启发。
0 有用 芝士气泡水 2022-12-30 22:14:20 上海
另一种互联网发展的可能。不过之前读的时候犯了理论先行的错误,以后要避免,不要为了证明理论往里面硬套经验材料,切记。
0 有用 沧海之哀伤 2022-12-22 17:23:00 江苏
我业余翻译了一下,目前翻译到第四章
0 有用 柴郡 2022-06-14 20:57:00
期待whz的翻译版!(目测等不到了!