This paragraph from todays New York Times infuriated me and might illustrate a larger problem...
The F.B.I. computer system was considered the joke of Washington, D.C.," the agency's former acting director, Thomas J. Pickard, said in written testimony submitted to the panel on Tuesday.
It was a startling admission, but then Mr. Pickard confessed he had not mastered one of the fundamentals of computer work: the keyboard. Under questioning, he testified that he sent an annual message by e-mail to all F.B.I. employees urging them to share their concerns. His secretary printed the replies.
"She'd print it out each night and say, `Here's your homework. Do it tonight and bring it back tomorrow,' " Mr. Pickard reported. "Because I don't type."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/15/politics/15NOTE.html
I work in media in New York City and many (not all) executives I have worked with above the age of 40 (I'm 30) regularly are techno-illiterate and have their assistants print out emails while they respond on the printouts.
How much does techno-illiteracy hurt us?
Does ignorance of technology by bureaucrats have other ramifications?
Are computers not bought because people in charge are scared of them?
How long till everyone in government is savvy with computers and technology? And savvy doesn't mean being able to code in groovy languages. Thirty years?
I feel like this is a huge issue...any other ideas how this questions should be framed or approached?
I am sure this isn't a progressive vs. conservative issue...it is a good government issue. Though at the moment we seem to "get it" more than they do.
But someone like <swoon>Howard Dean </swoon> who might not have been techno-savvy himself understood the capacity of technology and the importance of implementing it. For now, that may have to do. I have a feeling that there are a lot of Thomas Pickards in the Beltway.