30-Aug-85 12:40:59-PDT,6816;000000000000
Date: Fri 30 Aug 85 12:35:09-PDT
From: Peter G. Neumann <
[email protected]>
Subject: RISKS-1.3, 30 Aug 85
To: RISKS: ;
RISKS-FORUM Digest Friday, 30 Aug 1985 Volume 1 : Issue 3
FORUM ON RISKS TO THE PUBLIC IN COMPUTER SYSTEMS
Peter G. Neumann, moderator
(Contributions to
[email protected])
(Requests to
[email protected])
(This vol/no can be FTPed from SRI-CSL:<RISKS>RISKS-1.3)
(Issue n of vol 1 is in SRI-CSL:<RISKS>RISKS-1.n)
Contents:
Miscellaneous comments on V1#2 (Dave Curry)
Computer/hardship list (Jerome Rosenberg)
Medical KBES -- Some AI systems may need FDA approval
Health hazards of CRT use (Robin Cooper)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 85 21:22:44 EST
From:
[email protected] (Dave Curry)
To:
[email protected]
Subject: Miscellaneous comments on V1#2
Just some miscellaneous comments on some of the things in RISKS V1#2.
Hope this isn't too long.
1) Fishermen. This sounds like a crock to me. I wonder whether the
broken buoy or the fact that the storm was not predicted was the deciding
factor in the case. Since the NWS/NOAA is providing a service, which
nobody is *required* to use, I can't understand how they can be sued for
not predicting a storm. What would happen if they predicted a storm which
never showed up? Could all the fishermen who stayed home sue for their
lost profits? I can see it now.... "Cloudy Thursday, rain Friday -- use
this information at your own risk."
2) Union Carbide. I always wonder in cases like this whether the plant is
actually having more accidents than usual, or if because of Bhopal we're
just hearing about it more because the press has a new victim to pick on.
The number of accidents at that plant is disgraceful. Does anyone think
the government will shut it down?
3) Bob Carter's comments. I think I agree with PGN on these... I would
prefer to see RISKS cover more or less anything related to computer
"hazards", rather than centering on one or two things. There are plenty
of other lists which already take certain parts of this (e.g. SOFT-ENG for
"who's responsible" type stuff, ARMS-D for SDI). I also like the SEN
quotes -- I don't personally read SEN, and even if some of the stuff is
dumb (computer kills scientist), overall I think the brief summary PGN
provided in V1 #1 gives a nice broad range of topics to discuss.
4) Medical programs. I'm not sure I trust these fully yet. I'd have no
qualms about my doctor using one to *suggest* things to him, but I would
draw the line at his accepting the program's diagnosis unless he could
verify on his own that it was correct. For example, a heart specialist
interpreting a heart-diagnosis program's output would be good; a general
practicioner's taking it as gospel would not be good. We need to make sure
the doctor is capable of knowing when the program is wrong. (I saw a
comment about MYCIN once - "if you brought MYCIN a bicycle with a flat
tire, it would try like hell to find you an antibiotic.")
5) SDI. I'm going to leave this for the experts. I personally lean
towards Parnas's "side", but I don't know enough about it. I do
like reading the comments on it though. (BTW, for those of you who
haven't yet read Herb Lin's paper, it's excellent.)
Great list so far... keep it coming. As a (possibly) new topic, did
anyone go to this AI show in San Diego (?) or wherever? I saw a blurb on
it somewhere... how about a review of what the current toys are and what
risks they may take? I remember seeing something about a program to
interpret the dials and gauges of a nuclear power plant....
--Dave Curry
davy@purdue-ecn
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 85 14:00:58 cdt
From:
[email protected] (Rosenberg Jerome)
To: risks@sri-csla
Subject: Computer/hardship list
Peter: One basis for a focussed discussion of risks would be to try to
establish a list of those computer systems whose failure would cause great
hardship --economic, political, social --to a significant number of our
citizens. For example, the failure of our computer-controlled electric
power grid or the failure of the Reserve's check clearance system.
Your readers/participants could be asked to suggest the systems
to be included on the list. Your forum could then discuss probabilies
of failure,costs of failures vs failure time, etc. etc..
Jerry
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 30 Aug 1985 05:37:48-PDT
From: goun%
[email protected] (Ave decus virginum!)
To:
[email protected]
Subject: Medical KBES
Some AI systems may need FDA approval
Expert systems come within the FDA ambit to the extent that
they supplement doctor's work, according to Richard Beutal, a
Washington D.C. attorney specializing in the legal aspects of
technology.
An expert system may be defined as a computer program that
embodies the expertise of one or more human experts in some
domain and applies this knowledge to provide inferences and
guidance to a user. some of the earliest and most
sophisticated systems were developed for medical diagnosis:
MCYIN, EMCYIN, CADUCEUS AND ATTENDING. [There are several
more in use in Japan. --mjt]
Beutal called attention to proposed FDA regulations that, if
implemented, would require medical expert systems to obtain
FDA pre-marketing approval. Given that FDA approval for what
are class 3 devices could take up to 10 years and that
reclassifying such devices can take almost as long, these FDA
regulations would virtually cause investment to dry up.
{Government Computer News Aug 16, 1985}
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 85 10:35:20 cdt
From:
[email protected] (Robin Cooper)
To: risks@sri-csl
Subject: health hazards of CRT use
With respect to the introduction of the topic of the health hazards of
using video terminals, I would be particularly interested in seeing
discussion of risks to pregnant women and their unborn children. Both
Sweden and Canada have apparently introduced legislation which gives
pregnant women the right to change job assignments, whereas the
official US line seems to be that there is not sufficient risk to
warrant this.
Robin Cooper
------------------------------
End of RISKS-FORUM Digest
************************
-------
