Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Bridging the Digital Divide with Linux 222

Posted by michael from the linux-corps-of-engineers dept.
mpawlo writes: "I think you would be interested in a story on Advogato submitted today, discussing the digital divide and the role of Linux: "With respect to locating parts with lowered cost on software. There is one candidate the would evenly fit the requirement. As of this writing, there are several OS out there having those properties, but there is only one having a large developer base and community scattered around the globe that can act as support contacts. The name is called GNU/Linux. ... Bridging the Digital Divide requires an enormous amount of work for the techonology sector. A huge responsibility is placed on those who wish to take up the challenge. Current technologies in software, specifically, the Linux OS is a good candidate to play the role." Read the entire story."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bridging the Digital Divide with Linux More

Bridging the Digital Divide with Linux

Comments Filter:

  • Sure, Linux is nice ... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by s20451 ( 410424 )
    Linux helps, but it's not everything. Hardware is a much larger up-front cost than an OS, and there are always ongoing fees such as for internet access.
    • Windows XP home edition costs ~$200.

      Other MS OSs cost simular, with the lower end being a 'mere' $100 or so for the full version.

      Decent buget computers cost ~$400.

      That is a 25% price increase for the OS. Eeew.

      Not to mention that WAAAY to many people assume that you NEED word to type stuff.

      Advert stat office more and cut off the $$$ normaly spent licencing word.

      As I have said in the past though, most poor people don't give a fuck about 'software licencing'.

      They get it from a friend just like everybody else. ^_^

      • As I have said in the past though, most poor people don't give a fuck about 'software licencing'.

        You're quite right. In fact most students I know (who certainly fit the definition of "poor people") demonstrate their contempt for licensing and end up spending $0 for Windows, using the CD-burner "discount". I wonder if you can justify piracy based on social justice or as a protest movement? -- people need internet access to be productive members of society, but they can't afford it legally, so they get Windows any way they can.

        • Most college students don't need to play games why would they need ms windows?
        • people need internet access to be productive members of society, but they can't afford it legally, so they get Windows any way they can.

          Even accepting that Internet access is required tio be a "productive member of society" (which is doubtful), how cutting edge must your system be to allow this? Here [e-topco.com] is a p166 Compaq, warranteed for 30 days, for $40. Found it with 2 minutes of web surfing. It won't run Commander Taco's fabulous Xbox emulator [slashdot.org], but I am sure it suits any "productive" purpose.

          Every month, the US throws out enough PCs to put a small third-world nation online, most likely.

          • >Even accepting that Internet access is required tio be a "productive member of society" (which is doubtful)

            I don't know about that. I was required by the government of Ontario to use either the internet (at home) or the internet on a booth at one of their very few business registration centers between the hours of (exaggerating a little) 2:39-2:40 pm. According to the lady who works there, their computer stops working after 3:00 pm, although the office stays open until 5:00. For fun I asked if there was any way I could do anything there without using the computer. She said "no". Must be a sweeet job!

            Anyways, that Compaq system doesn't include an OS.
            • Anyways, that Compaq system doesn't include an OS.

              So, borrow someone's pc and zipdrive, d/l something compact like Grey Cat [myweb.nl] and install. Once you're online, d/l your chosen distro.

              With a PC like this you want to run a free OS. Win 95 is outmoded, and any more recent version of windows demands a beefier system.

      • It gets even worse when you realize that we're pretty much hit a plateau. If you're not a power gamer or running a server, and you don't need the absolute latest version of some Windows product, then Linux on last year's machine is pretty snappy.

        It gets much worse when you realize that I didn't use "last year's machine" as a relative term. I mean that Linux isn't just tolerable, it's perfectly usable and runs A Windows-like GUI (KDE or Gnome) just fine on a circa 1998 computer (P700, 256 MB RAM, 10 GB disk and 8MB video card). On top of that, modulo needs for more memory, it will probably continue to be perfectly usable on that hardware for the next 5 years, if not longer.

        Sooner or later, someone's going to realize this - that we've more or less hit a commodity point for computer hardware. As time passes, they'll be able to offer an (almost) disposable PC - cheap processor, cheap drive, cheap ethernet, cheap video. The whole thing will be a third the size of a notebook, and cost around $100 just for the hardware. Long before you reach that point, though, putting a Microsoft OS on the machine becomes ludicrous; the only company that could possibly afford to do so in that environment would be Microsoft themselves.

    • On the other hand, someone commented a few days ago about the fact that now a decent computer for doing average tasks could cost as much as the MS software that would be on it. For some people, we've already passed the necessary power and as the passable hardware gets cheaper, software will be an increasing part of the price. We're not talking about people who will be buying dual-Athlons with a 1GB of RAM and a RAID5 array of 180GB hard-drives - if this is talking about what I think it is, the average computer might be 750Mhz with 128MB or RAM. Another factor is that Microsoft software requirse more and more resources, so they are pushing up the lower limit too fast for some people.

    • Re:Sure, Linux is nice ... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by nizo ( 81281 )
      Yes, but when you can get a decent machine for less than $200 and a redhat CD for $8 from cheapbytes, why spend $80 for windows XP, which you technically have to purchase with new hardware, and wouldn't run on your used machine anyway? As for net access, thats where we luck out here in the U.S. since many libraries offer free access (nothing there to do with linux there, unless your library uses it).
      • I agree. I'm sick of the bloat ware that forces you to continue to upgrade your hardware. I mean come on how much horsepower do you really need to run a word processor. I swear cpu manufactures are in bed with windows.

        Intel: Hey could you add some more bloat to your system so we can sell more cpu's.

        Windows: Sure, we were gonna do it anyway. How else would the consumer know we added new "value"?

        • A lot of the bloat comes from the perceived desire for computers to function as "multimedia machines," and to MS's desire to integrate functions into the OS. Has there been a single word from MS about the develpment and release plans for the "slim XP" version that was mndated by the government settlement? Considering how surprisingly stable the bloated XP is, that could be an impressive little OS, if MS acts in good faith.

    • Internet access isn't everything. When you get a computer that would be good enough for someone who had never had a computer before for probably $150 or less, and Windows ME costs $100 or so, I'd say that's a big part of the cost right there.
      • Damn right. My wife's family (easily uppper-lower class) never had a computer until they bought a stripped system for $25. I spent $200 in hardware to make it useable, and "borrowed" my office's Windows image CD (98 SE). Buying that OS would have doubled the amount of money I would have had to spend, most likely making it not feasible. Also, they are not likely Linux converts since they can barely handle email. As for the Internet access, until last month they kept switching from free provider (until it went bankrupt) to the next free provider. They had to finally suck it up and pay for the 'net when I couldn't find anymore free providers for them.

        And the best part is my home Mac system is 7 years old and still quite useable under OS9. I swear that old, donated Macs would be the true answer to "bridging the digital divide". They just last. There is even a website devoted to old Macs, LowEndMac.com.

    • Hardware Costs. (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ImaLamer ( 260199 )
      Many people here were complaining about the project where a computer in every home was promised.

      The biggest complaint was Linux upkeep, and hardware. Hardware doesn't have to include GeForce cards, or even x86 machines. Any cheap maybe even diskless machine could be enough.

      In my area, one of the neighborhoods that need help is adjacent to the downtown area. Many of the people live in a relativly small area too. It's also within blocks, including surrounding blocks, of our main library branch.

      A network of computers could be linked the this existing system. I also suggest that the 'net' should be wired with/to the library. You can fight over small details such as what type of connections should be used - but if we are talking a 'kick start', much isn't needed.

      We all know that an old[er] machine can run linux well, and even better; they can be controlled and configured from a distance.

      Why give away free computers to play quake? Give people enough to get on the internet easily and quickly. Because we have all the source-code available, anyone can tailor the computer to boot into the gui and give maybe, a few icons to point you to the web or other services.

      Don't give anyone 'root' passwords. The computers are public property and are managed by the library. If the user wants a printer, they can get one. If they want to save things that are private: use a disk. Restrict snooping by the city, but simply remind the users that it's not 100% safe. Logs will be kept, but not reviewed unless asked by a judge.

      The users basically have no rights on the system. They can play games, go to uproar, even post to slashdot. But since the library controls the system they control the software, the maintenance, and access.

      Maybe offer two DNS servers and let the user just hit a button: "Restricted Access" or "Unrestricted Access". Once set, it's set. The computer pics the correct DNS server with the correct DNS entries.

      Basically, no frills, no problems. After initial setup, one skilled person could maintain all the computers. Journaling filesystems save the computer from crashes and if something breaks, the user reboots it with the CD in... reformatted, reinstalled.

      If the city chooses to do so, offer a place to save settings online.
      • What a fucking commie!

        Posted at +1 cause I care!
        • Thanks, I guess it's nothing for the poor!

          Save the children then... would I not be a commie?
          • No its more about the comment "But since the library controls the system they control the software, the maintenance, and access." and the general idea, of sure, we'll help you out, but we will OWN you once we do. Have a nice day!
            • They are public domain.

              Stipped down boxes.

              Provides basics for education and any information you need.

              Most things can be done through the web alone.

              The public shouldn't provide a toy.

              People won't give their tax dollars for toys and tools for corruption.

              The computer can be used as a tool.

              Nothing is invaded because only the computer is in question.

              No contact with you and the library except for help and updates/upgrades.

              If someone is suspected to have committed a crime, it should be investigated.

              'Community Standards' will have to provide if goatse.cx is blocked. Usually the sherrif would do this, but rather - nothing the library wouldn't carry, you won't see on the web. Drug info will stay, but fisting maybe out.

      • If they want to save things that are private: use a disk.

        A CD burner will add upwards of $100 to the cost of the machine.

    • Re:Sure, Linux is nice ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Eloquence ( 144160 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @09:11PM (#2830788)
      I don't think hardware is really much of a problem in the long run. Consider the things you can do online:

      • mail and news
      • browse the web
      • access ftp sites

      These are really the primary applications. Multimedia is of limited relevance in third world countries. None of these applications requires a high-end computer. Even web-browsing can be done on an old 486 if text-mode browsing is acceptable (and thanks to open-source developers, browsers like links, lynx and w3m keep getting updated and are capable of viewing most online text).

      So anything from a 486 onward can be used to access the Net (and to develop software) if you use a low-footprint system like Linux. We're talking about computers that can be bought for 20 bucks [ebay.com] and less. Add another 30 bucks for an old 14" and a modem, and you`re all set - the software is free.

      The "digital divide" is only a symptom of a far larger problem, the economic divide between the north and south. If you can't afford food, you are unlikely to care about Internet access. However, if you have your basic needs met, getting a cheap system set up is completely viable.

      The real problem in doing so with Linux is knowledge: While there is information about everything you need to know somewhere, the information you find online and offline is of very varying quality. Without a rating database to find the most relevant texts (such as this free Linux book [sf.net] from South Africa) people will simply not know how and where to start. Future Linux distributions will have to become knowledge portals, guiding the user to information about everything from software development to system administration. While the distros already come with a lot of docs, many of them are not introductory, and many of the good free books are missing.

    • When the OS costs _nothing_ or 2 dollars or 29 dollars, it's obvious that hardware costs are going to overshadow basic OS costs, eh?

      That aside, if you are living in or near a major city you can very easily pick up perfectly good used hardware in local PC shops and have a basic desktop in the PII 350 mHz class for under 200 dollars. 17 monitor for $75. That's not bad at all. I see this used equipment advertised in papers alongside new systems and when i go to these stores there are always stacks of Dells, IBM, HP and the stacks are there because there is demand for the stuff. You see tech guys come in and literally load a company van with it. This may sound a little weird but it's exciting to see so much utility lying around cheap as dirt. Linux and open source software strike me in kind of the same way, want to run a router for your home? grab a P166 for 35 bucks stick some used nics in it and set up a network. Run SAMBA and email on another old box, set up a webserver and opennap on another. There's not much limit to what you can do providing you can afford the bandwidth for it to make sense. The hardware is plentiful and cheap and the software is powerful and free.
      Consider that in many of the homes of those less fortunate the television and VCR cost as much as that used PII system - and that those 2 items will defintely be there.

      Internet access can be less than $20/mo for dialup in the US and in some cases (again in the US) it can even be free. High speed access of course costs money and I don't expect that to change.
      On the whole though, this gap is one can be bridged if we try.
      It would be nice to see some leadership on this matter from government to help bridge the gap. I agree that lack of familarity with computing and online access will be yet another barrier isolating the less fortunate from the mainstream of opportunity enjoyed by the middle class and up, but I am sad to say that this all seems a world away from the interests and concerns of our present government.
      To them, charity is $234 million in retroactive tax breaks for Enron.

  • What? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Burgundy Advocate ( 313960 )
    First of all... "Digital Divide". When the hell did we all start speaking like politicians?

    Next: Linux has better tech support...? What? I know that many linux users are willing to help out with problems, but they don't always know what they're talking about. At all. I've had people tell me all kinds of shit that didn't work.

    Now I realize that they mean well, but most people aren't going to want to try what one guy said, find out it didn't work, read through all the documentation, get quite confused, post to a mailing list, and eventually give up and reinstall. If they were using Windows or MacOS, on the other hand, they could have just called right off... and those operating systems are included free with the computer.

    Sometimes closed source companies have an advantage. I think this is one of those cases.
    • Have you ever tried to call MS support?

      It's about as helpful as those help menus they have in Windows.
    • and those operating systems are included free with the computer.

      Correction: those operating systems are included with the computer. As it has been stated throughout this discussion, the cost of propriety software included in prepackaged systems can ammount to a significant proportion of the final system's price. Free? I don't think so.

    • agreed. Plus, if I need windows help, 9/10 times the girl next door can find me a solution. Linux isn't so easy, I'm lucky to know 3 people in this town that run it, and 1 of those knows less (!) than I do. It's not about calling support, it's about the sheer amount of brain cells with Linux info in them that exist in the world. Using Linux for it's wide user-base and easy help is like using a toaster to keep your house cool.
    • If you have a problem with linux, you can post on usenet and get an answer in a short while. Of course, you can do the same exact thing with windows problems. Linux tech support isn't "better", it's about the same.

  • Solving the wrong problem (Score:3, Insightful)

    by soundsop ( 228890 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @08:50PM (#2830712) Homepage
    I think that spending large amounts of resources to eliminate the "digital divide" is a waste of time and effort.

    The real problem in the world is that the economic policy of rich countries (the G7 countries---but primarily the US, given the demise of the Soviets) serves to keep the majority of people in the Third World impoverished.

    Promote education, health care, and worker's rights throughout the world, and we'll be in a position to eliminate the "digital divide."

    Trying to eliminate the digital divide directly is akin to going to a homeless person on your street corner and handing him a Palm Pilot with Internet access. He's not in a position to use it to his advantage. His problems are deeper than that.
    • Trying to eliminate the digital divide directly is akin to going to a homeless person on your street corner and handing him a Palm Pilot with Internet access. He's not in a position to use it to his advantage. His problems are deeper than that.

      Great point. Assist these people in finding work, shelter etc... Bring them up to a(an economic) level where they could benefit from it. The people speaking about the dgital divide are incapable of seperating need from want. I need the internet...or how would I get up to the minute stock quotes?!?

      I think that senators believe that solving the digital divide issue would be easier than solving unemployment etc...that is why they place so much emphasis on it. It is one of those problems where simply throwing money at it will help.
    • Don't you know? Everyone who's poor is automatically lazy, whoever has money earned it through hard work. Haven't you read slashdot before?

      It's just a coincidence that all those lazy poor people live in third world countries.
    • You need to take it one step at a time.
      First let people have jobs so that they can be
      workers, who make some money, who have some
      rights, who spend some money so that more investment flows into their country, so that more
      people have jobs, ...

      Agree with what you say about G7 though.

      Pardonne

  • What is the point of Linux and BSD Competing? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It would be better to combine both operating systems to create a new OS that would compete better with Microsoft.

    What is the point of having two seperate development projects of a compatible UNIX operating system? Wouldn't it be better to have just one OS base like Microsoft does when they ditched the Win9x base?

    Instead of splitting development on two different OS's, one OS would be able to bridge the digital devide much better.
    • I think what you're talking about is one or the other dying off. Well lets look at the options in this regard. You could make the argument that the "Linus" of the BSD world, Jordan Hubbard, is working on Darwin now, and that FreeBSD will suffer as a result. Also, the next FreeBSD major release date has more or less been set to "...err, we'll let you know sometime in 2003".

      So as much as I loathe to feed the trolls, there is some strong evidence to suggest that the BSD community is losing interest, motivation, or both. Its hard to deny that they are slowing down.

      So I'd say Linux is the quite obvious choice, but note that this community is also being splintered as people move on to other interesting technologies as they linux hype wanes. I suspect OSX will capture some of this audience, particularly those linux users who have given up on desktop linux (you know, those people who don't describe themselves as "gluttons for punishment"). XP and Win2k will also get some users, now that they are bridging the stability divide (and once people realize most of the tools they love on linux are in cygwin).

      Guess we'll have to wait and see.

  • As another poster has pointer out, the software costs are only part of the Digital Divide. In that area, Linux has many large advantages

    However, there are other areas that are part of the Digital Divide. There is also the hardware aspect (the largest expense) and the knowledge aspect as well. Again, another poster has already discussed the hardware problems.

    Even if we were to give every poor/underpriviledged person in America a free computer running Linux, it would do little to bridge the Digital Divide. With it, we would need to teach them at least the basics about how to use it and, more importantly, how to find instructions on how to do more. Tools without the knowledge of how to use them are useless.
    • People will learn from trying to use these machines though, I was never told anything about using computers apart from dir shows you whats in a directory, cd changes the directory, and anything that ends in .bat, .exe or .com runs when you type its name. Anything else I found out was from playing around.
      Sure, not everyone will feel like its safe to just play around, but alot of people will and these ones will probably be able to pass knowledge onto their friends/family.
      People learn more from trying things and remembering mistakes they have made, so giving away free machines (running linux or whatever) would probably make a big difference to this digital divide thing.
      • People learn more from trying things and remembering mistakes they have made, so giving away free machines (running linux or whatever) would probably make a big difference to this digital divide thing.

        Yes, that is true. Remember, though that we are talking about all sorts of people here. Many of them lack the basic skills needed to figure out where to go for the information.

        That is one of the biggest problems brought about by today's educational systems: a lot of people do not know how to teach themselves what they need to know. In order to make ANY attempt to bridge the Digital divide successful, you need to include education for those receiving the help.

        For example, if you wanted to start a program to increase the number of carpenters out there by giving all the woodworking tools they'd need away, it would do very little good. They still need to learn how to use the tools effectively. I'm sure that, over time, they could figure them out, but many people will not have that kind of patience.

  • The "Digital Divide" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @08:59PM (#2830749) Journal
    I don't buy this whole "Digital Devide" concept. Back in high school, I worked in a grocery store. There were many adult co-workers that would be considered the bottom of the working class. Some of them worked two jobs.

    One day one of them brought up that he wanted to get a computer for his son, but he obviously couldn't afford anything new. I sold him a 486 class PC with monitor and modem for about $100, which was around what they cost back then, maybe a little less than what they cost. He could get on the Internet, and his kid could get computer experience.

    If a man working minimum wage can get a system from the trash bin of a geek who also worked for minimum wage, for a couple days pay, then all these people whining about the "digital divide" are mostly rich people who couldn't imagine what it is like to actually have to work hard to get the things you need.

    There are many other examples, some of the people I chat with on IRC are what would be considered very poor in the US sense, and have basically put together computers from with others have thrown out.

    They have the exact same access to information that someone with a 2Ghz P4 does.
    It may not be as fast, or as flashy, or a "rich media experience", but that stuff isn't important anyway, when you are arguing that this underclass won't have access to the same information that the upper classes would.

    I don't know how it is in other countries, I don't claim to, but here in the US, the "digital divide" is a fabrication.

    I know, you will say that I didn't sell him an OS license with the computer. That is true. The only thing left that can create a digital divide is software that costs too much to buy, and ways to prevent users from running unauthorized software.

    So while I argue that there isn't currently a digital divide, laws like the SSSCA could easily create one by ending piracy by people who really can't afford the software.

    As far as free software goes, I couldn't have put Linux on his computer. First off because this was 1995 and I didn't know what Linux was, and second off, he would want to be able to install commonly available software. I don't know what this says about free software, but when people get stuff from their friends, they want to be able to use it in their computer. Sneakernet is still big among the non-geeks. People pass around software programs, just like the 1980s C64 user groups. They want to be able to run this software.

    I don't know if this message has a point, at least upon re-reading it, it seems pretty disjointed, but I hope it makes sense.

    • Re:The "Digital Divide" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sam_handelman ( 519767 ) <samuel.handelmanNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday January 12, 2002 @10:36PM (#2830986) Journal
      I don't buy this whole "Digital Devide" concept. ... people I chat with on IRC are what would be considered very poor in the US sense, and have basically put together computers from with others have thrown out.

      That is vaccuous reasoning.

      It is true that poor people can get computers (my parents managed when I was a kid) but that does not mean that there isn't a digital divide. A well organised, informed or minimally well connected working class person can get health care for their kids - it may not be great but it will meet their basic needs. Are you going to argue, therefore, that the lower vaccination rates among poor children don't reflect inferior access to health care? After all, the resources are theoretically available to vaccinate all those poor children.

      people whining about the "digital divide" are mostly rich people who couldn't imagine what it is like to actually have to work hard to get the things you need.

      I'm a whining rich person because I want to see their kids vaccinated, while I get health care from my fellowship?

      The fact of the matter is - and the article has these statistics so I'm not going to repeat them - poor people are less likely to have computers. This has a number of impacts on their lives, both economic and cultural, which have also been rehashed endlessly. If ways can be found to get computers for more of them, or to reduce the economic sacrifices they have to make to get them, can we all agree that it is a good thing?

      In terms of overall benefit to the culture of the net - which is richer in human content (as opposed to fast, or [.] flashy, or a "rich media experience", but that stuff isn't important anyway) the more people are on it, we're better off spending resources to get the working class connected, than on any buzzing, bleeping toy (like the 40+" flat screen I've been eyeing, ) you could imagine.

      It isn't as huge a deal as the failure to get children vaccinated (criminal to my mind - but my background is in biology), but that doesn't mean it is nothing.

      Minority children have less computers in their schools. [rand.org] This digital divide is definitely narrowing - and the very poorest schools (in terms of percent children in poverty) have more computers per student than average, because of all the federal money they get; however, most of those are alternative or remedial schools, and I doubt they have more computers than alternative or remedial schools in wealthy districts.

      Anyway, as we are well remember from all that fallout with companies supplying computers to schools in exchange for running ads (there was a slashdot story about it but I can't find it), the money for schools to pay for computers is still a major issue, especially in poor schools. That is where organised promotion of open source can really make it's mark - and, hopefully, propogate as an ethic among the next generation.
      • poor people are less likely to have computers. This has a number of impacts on their lives, both economic and cultural, which have also been rehashed endlessly. If ways can be found to get computers for more of them, or to reduce the economic sacrifices they have to make to get them, can we all agree that it is a good thing?
        So...if we give the poor computers, that will complete their lives, and all will be well
      • If ways can be found to get computers for more of them, or to reduce the economic sacrifices they have to make to get them, can we all agree that it is a good thing?

        If the social experiments of pasts decades have taught us anything it is that throwing money at a (social) problem never makes it go away, and usually makes it bigger. People complain about the "digital divide" and are concerned that the underprivelidged are missing out on cultural benefits of the online world. The deeper problem is that most of the lower classes have no interest in the culture of the net, and if given computers would not take advantage of the rich human content of the web.

        The root problem is that the lower class is comprised mostly of poor civic citizens, but addressing that problem is very difficult and complicated. So people just try and throw money (or hardware) at the problem, hoping it will fix itself.

        There is a digital divide, but it is a symptom of a larger cultural divide, and giving out computers will not fix the problem.
        • throwing money at a (social) problem never makes it go away, and usually makes it bigger.

          That is a rather sweeping generalisation to make, but not germane, in any case.

          I recommend you go against the grain and read the article which talks about how open source software might help to bridge the digital devide, rather than jumping off on this tangent.

          The deeper problem is that most of the lower classes have no interest in the culture of the net, and if given computers would not take advantage of the rich human content of the web.

          Really? You got any research to back that up? Do you want to read the UCLA internet usage report [ucla.edu] which was on slashdot a month or so ago?

          I'm certain that poor people are proportionally less interested in the slashdotesque, and therefore, more likely than not, are proportionally less interested in whatever aspects of net culture the typical slashdot reader favors.

          The root problem is that the lower class is comprised mostly of poor civic citizens,

          Calvinist prick.

          There is a digital divide, but it is a symptom of a larger cultural divide, and giving out computers will not fix the problem.

          When did I propose giving anyone computers? I compared the lack of computers (not given away) with the lack of health care (theoretically given away.) When I was talking about how our resources would best be spent, I was talking about technical time/inventiveness, not money - although, certainly, technical inventiveness can be sold.

          The article is not about giving computers away - it is about how open source software may help reduce the cost (I said required economic sacrifices) for the poor/minorities to get computers.
      • > poor people are less likely to have computers. This has a number of impacts on their lives, both economic and cultural, which have also been rehashed endlessly. If ways can be found to get computers for more of them, or to reduce the economic sacrifices they have to make to get them, can we all agree that it is a good thing?

        You can give a computer to a Homo Habilis, and he'll use it - but he'll use it to crack nuts.

        What educational value does a computer provide to someone who may not even be able to read?

        If you assert that it's "better" to get the news from cnn.com than from watching TV, that's fine -- but people with poor reading skills won't start reading cnn.com because they have a computer, they'll continue to watch TV. They won't "learn" a damn thing until they want to. (They'll play Quake on it, they'll enjoy MP3s, they'll get advertised at by AOL, but they won't learn unless they want to learn.)

        Anyone (poor or not) who does want to use a computer to to learn stuff, or to educate their kids, has probably already spent the $100 for a Pentium-class PC and pirated the educational software required.

        I see the "digital divide" as a red herring. As others have pointed out, it sounds good, and it's a problem that can be solved by throwing money at it. It's a problem in search of a solution in search of a problem, if you will. The only ones likely to benefit are those who take your money for the solution.

        It's a literacy divide, not a digital one.

    • Agreed, its a hackneyed political prop (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @11:55PM (#2831142)
      No one has clearly told me where the divide is. Is it people on welfare? Well they all have cable TV, so clearly they are just picking a noninteractive diversion over and interactive one.

      Politicos come up with props like this precisely because they know no one will ever pick the scab off and determine what they mean - its treated as self evident. Now that its treated as a given that the divide exists, it can be used as leverage in government spending bills.

      In any case, this begs an entirely other different question - why do we care if people have computers at home??? Do we concern ourselves with a "TV divide"? How about an "SUV divide"? Home computers, particularly those connected to the net, are primarily used for entertainment, and you know what I'm talking about.

    • Re:The "Digital Divide" (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MrResistor ( 120588 ) <peterahoffNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Sunday January 13, 2002 @02:06AM (#2831465) Homepage
      There is a HUGE difference between being poor in North America and being poor anywhere else in the world. It's the poor in the rest of the world who are truely suffering from the Digital Divide. Anyone in the US can get access to the internet if they want it, even if it means using a terminal at the local library. The same is not true in, say, Nigeria.

      You make an interesting point about piracy, though. I read somewhere recently that in a lot of countries that are currently bootstrapping themselves into into the digital age Windows is fairly popular, mostly because it's all pirated. Linux is often a popular choice as well, but has no economic advantage since Windows is free-as-in-beer also.

    • Amen. The Digital Divide is a fabrication that politicians invented (was it all Gore? ;) so they could pat themselves on the back when they "solved" all the problems due to poverty by simply throwing hardware at it. The "Digital Divide" is simply the symptom of a socioeconomic divide that nobody wants to talk about. There was a Telivision Divide in the 50s, a Video Recorder divide in the 80s. Who cares. It's insulting that we minimize the problems of poverty, etc., by treating some superficial and largely irrelevant symptom (oh no the homeless can't download warez, what *shall* we do?!). I also realize it is a false choice to present resolving the core problem and ameliorating the symptoms as mutually exclusive, they aren't of course, but could we please stop yammering about the "Digital Divide" already? Maybe in 1996 it meant something, but not now. It's just so self-indulgent. There *are* non-geeky ways to help people.

  • The Global Digital Divide Illustrated. (Score:3, Informative)

    by tcd004 ( 134130 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @09:01PM (#2830756) Homepage
    The digital divide is often an ethereal concept without any hard facts to show its actual existence. However, it is easy to see when various indicators are compared and contrasted. Take this "Globalization Index" [66.113.195.237] prepared by Foreign Policy Magazine. [foreignpolicy.com] The results are very much skewed towards countries with advanced tech sectors. This chart [66.113.195.237] of the gulf in the digital divide over the past 5 years is particularly interesting.
  • Why do people think a basic user should be running Linux on their desktop? A lot of people don't even have much comprehension of Microsoft Windows or Mac OS, that runs of the computer they have. People who don't even have a computer would find Linux a lot harder to use than either of those two commercial operatings systems.

    What a lot of people want is a machine where they don't really need to get help. What they want is something that is about as complicated, or even easier, than programming a VCR.

    • People who don't even have a computer would find Linux a lot harder to use than either of those two commercial operatings systems.

      I think this is a common misconception about Linux. It's probably based on the fact that most people who have used Linux had a hard time learning it because they had to learn something different from what they already knew. Everyone I've ever met who has used Linux used a different OS first. They were already experienced computer users. When they started learning it they discovered that most of the things they took for granted before no longer applied, little things like hotkeys and how to cut and paste are different, so they get frustrated and it seems harder than when they were first learning how to use a computer. It isn't. As you say:

      A lot of people don't even have much comprehension of Microsoft Windows or Mac OS, that runs of the computer they have.

      They have so little comprehension of their OS because it doesn't matter that much. People will learn what they have, whether it's Windows, MacOS, or Linux, and any of them are equally bewildering to the beginner. Once learned it's just as easy to use, too.

      Linux is not hard. It certainly was at one point, but we've been past that point for at least a year now. With a modern distro one no longer needs to ever see a command line, even during installation and configuration.

      No one is proposing that we hand people a pile of old hardware and a slackware CD and send them on their way. That would be an equally rediculous proposition if we were to hand them a Windows or MacOS CD. We're talking about prebuilt systems with Linux preinstalled and configured to work out of the box, just like the one they'd get from Gateway or Dell except it costs them $100 less for the same hardware, or even much cheaper for lesser hardware which would be unbearably slow under Windows. I don't know of anyone offering such a thing, all the preinstalled Linux boxes I know of are meant to be servers or high-end workstations, and seem to start at about $1500. There's no reason it couldn't be done, though.

      As long as we're on the topic of installation, though, having recently upgraded several Windows and Linux machines (Windows 98 to Windows 2000 and SuSE various to SuSE 7.3) Linux was by far easier. Much of that has to do with the fact that with Linux everything is there on the install disk(s); driver, utilities, applications, etc. Not so with Windows 2000. All that stuff had to be hunted down and installed seperately. Never mind the fact that having to reinstall all your drivers when you're upgrading a working machine is completely asinine. Installing SuSE 7.3 from scratch is incredibly simple as well, again because everything is right there. All my hardware was autodetected without a hitch. The only thing that might complicate it is if you have a windows install you'd like to preserve. Much easier than installing Windows.

  • Two important considerations: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MsGeek ( 162936 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @09:21PM (#2830812) Homepage Journal
    1.) Linux with a major-league GUI (Gnome/KDE) is getting almost as resource-hungry as anything out of Redmond or Cupertino.

    2.) Most Linux distributions are pointing themselves towards the Latest And Greatest hardware, not towards making elderly machines useful again. There are 486en being ground up for scrap every day or winding up in landfills.

    The answer to this would be a distro specifically designed for old machines. Much of the groundwork has already been laid by attempts (both successful and not) to bring Linux into an embedded environment. It's not as sexy a project as writing kewl games but it's NEEDED. The old computers that enterprises throw out on a daily basis could be put to use by the less fortunate. However, the big distros aren't gonna get it for this old iron. Certainly not Mandrake. Maybe not Red Hat. Maybe not even Debian or Slack.

    If you want to really DO SOMETHING to help the less fortunate get wired...this is what it takes. I'm not a programmer, so I really can't be a part of this. But not being a programmer doesn't mean I can't see the need.
    • There is plenty of work being done on light weight Linuxs.

      Check out Freesco [freesco.org]

      Freesco stands for "free cisco" but it can do much more than route. It is a single 1.44MB floppy disk distro built on Linux that has a router, firewall, DHCP server, DNS, Print server, web admin interface, web server, time server, ethernet bridge, and dialup client. I'm using it on an old 486 as a print server without a hard disk, monitor, or keyboard, and it's working great. Took about a 1/2 hour to set up.

      Other light distros that I have not used are Trinux, theWall, Build Your Linux Disk (not a distro, but a way to make a single floppy with the tools you need on it), single floppy mp3 players (Amacdys), Fli4l ISDN Router, and many many others. There are also some multiple floppy distros, they fit on about 5 or 6 floppies.

      Bero from Red Hat is working on a bootable CD based on RH RawHide that will automatically play the movie contents of that CD via xine, I think he calls it "VCR on a CD"

      For computers with more disk space (500MB), if you want a GUI, I would suggest just installing a base X install and a window manager. You don't need Gnome or KDE, just the libraries to support Gnome or KDE apps. Should be less than a GB all said and done. A text based shell script can be used to allow newbie users to launch their apps.

      Also, 500MB disks are about $5 now. Those can be used with software RAID0 to make a reasonably big disk to work from.

      There are many things out there. I would suggest helping out with the many existing lightweight Linux projects rather than starting new ones.
    • If you want to really DO SOMETHING to help the less fortunate get wired...this is what it takes. I'm not a programmer, so I really can't be a part of this. But not being a programmer doesn't mean I can't see the need.
      Not at all. Even as a non-programmer you can do two things that the effort really can't do without:
      1. Write specifications, and
      2. Write documentation.
      In case you hadn't noticed, these are areas where the hard-core geeks sometimes have difficulty (or just don't want to bother). If you have skills in those areas, being unable to program is probably no handicap so long as you can think and write clearly.

  • What do non-american/uk say about this article? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @09:31PM (#2830832) Journal
    This is going to sound like a broken record, but its hard to have a computer when you don't even have electricity.

    Id like to hear people from countries where they had to skimp and save for computers, like India, where even thou the pay is low, people still buy computers and Internet access.

    I have a friend in Croatia, and he talks about how he seen people get killed in the local wars, worried about getting drafted, and not being able to finish college. Digital Divide, how about stopping the damn race/holy wars so people can at least progress from the iron age.

    -
    War is not nice. - Barbara Bush
    • Well, seems like MS is doing far more lobbying here than Linux (and probably far more bribing).
      The government isn't in favour of Linux yet, but one state (Goa) is pushing Linux. They have old secondhand donated Pcs (486/P100s, with low RAM) in schools.

      Sadly, this seems like it will be an exception.

  • Filling in for the Grammar Nazi (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    From the article:

    The name is called GNU/Linux

    I read this as 'The name is stored in a variable called GNU/Linux'.Fine...

    I don't care what the name's called, what is it?
  • and trash their equipment rather than recycle it back to those who use it have a wealth of hardware available that could be used for this bridging purpose.

    Even equipment that is 3-4 years old is still useful for a linux workstations and web browsers. Older equipment like this which could be donated, could give these people a chance to figure out how to use computers and the internet without a huge investment of money. It would also have the added benefit of starting them out with Linux and other open source software and they would have a better chance of being loyal to our cause. :)

    -Restil
    • I work for a company that routinely trashes old equipment. Just this year I've watched at least 20 Pentium computers go through the trash, including a number of inkjet printers, scanners, and even a LaserJet.


      The problem is that it takes a lot of employee time to clean up these old computers for donation; time to check that everything is functional, to do the install, etc. - perhaps two hours of time each. It turns into a costly process that there aren't any resources to put to (any IS department is always plenty busy).


      In a nutshell, if you really want to help out your local schools, give your name to companies in your area and start arranging the setup of this equipment yourself.

      • The problem is that it takes a lot of employee time to clean up these old computers for donation; time to check that everything is functional, to do the install, etc.

        A bigger problem is to make sure none of the licensed software and company's confidential materials are accidentally left on drives and tapes and floppies... Whether the computer works or not is secondary to the company.

        But I believe there is a much bigger reason to destroy stuff: taxes. Giving hardware away can cost you a lot.

  • The real problem is not hardware or software (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Graff ( 532189 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @10:06PM (#2830913)
    I work for a Boys & Girls Club in one of the more depressed cities in the Unites States. We get tons of equipment and software donated to us from all sorts of companies, organizations, etc. The real problem is not the cost of the items, but rather the cost of the support and the lack of qualified people who want to work for a non-profit.

    It's all well and fine to say that Linux costs next to nothing, but it is much harder to find people to support it. I know most places would rather use software which cost more up front but didn't need a software guru to set up and maintain. Sadly, we don't get the volunteer support we need to use most of the free software out there.

    I know that there are some distributions of Linux out there that are pretty easy to use and set up, but they still don't compare to Windows or MacOS in overall ease. Sad, but true.

    BTW - If anyone is in the Bridgeport, Connecticut area feel free to look up the Boys & Girls Clubs of Bridgeport. We have piles of old donated equipment and only limited time to fix and set up. Any help would be a godsend! Thanks.
    • I know that there are some distributions of Linux out there that are pretty easy to use and set up, but they still don't compare to Windows or MacOS in overall ease.

      Not true. Try SuSE 7.3. With YaST2 install and admin are a breeze, and hardware autodetection is excellent. The default install is extremely usable, and the only reason you'd ever need to see a command line is if your hardware won't run X.

  • You are not interested in 'solving' the "DD" (Score:5, Informative)

    by mr ( 88570 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @10:11PM (#2830929)
    * Shift the cost away from the consumer.
    * Lower the cost making it affordable.
    * Minimize parts to near zero cost.
    * Subsidize the cost.
    * Use parts having zero cost.
    With respect to locating parts with lowered cost on software. There is one candidate the would evenly fit the requirement. As of this writing, there are several OS are out there having those properties, but there is only one having a large developer base and community scattered around the globe that can act as support contacts. The name is called GNU/Linux.

    The author is so desperate to push a GNU/Linux adjenda that he is willing to warp reality as shamelessly as a Microsoft PR employee.

    To make a claim that the ONLY choice is GNU/Linux is a flat out lie. *BSD is an equally fine choice. Why? Given most of the user space and user applications are the SAME across the UNIX space, if the statement "community scattered around the globe that can act as support contacts" is true, and most of the code in a complete GNU/Linux system is the same across the UNIX world, then *BSD is as good a choice as *Linux.

    The Author even KNOWS he's lying, look at his verbage. He states "there is one candidate [that] would evenly fit the bill" Ok, so he's establishing there is one. Then he says "But there is only one" - this is the slip up in verbage. He'd already established there is 'but one choice' then he claims only one has the 'global reach'....why make the claim if there is only one?

    Having the GNU blinders on, means the author misses the reality that wealth is built on Intellectual Property. The idea behind the GPL is to tear down IP. Using a BSD licence and BSD software means you can create economic value by choosing to protect IP. By actualling having IP to bring to the economic table, the "digitally divided" have IP to barter for money.

    As you can see, the author doesn't actually CARE about the global condition....unless the answer to that condition is GNU/Linux.

  • A modest proposal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gewalker ( 57809 ) <Gary DOT Walker AT AstraDigital DOT com> on Saturday January 12, 2002 @10:32PM (#2830974)
    1 -- require Microsoft (and other software companies) to make abandonware revert to free-use by anyone. Don't require company to necessarily make old versions available for download at now cost, just eliminate copyright protection for versions that are no longer supported.

    2 -- Change copyright protection for software to a maximum of 5 years. Abandonware would simply accelerate the push into public domain.

    3 -- Eliminate shrink wrap agreements, these are onerous burdens on uneducated consumers. Specify a standard commercial conduct code for shrink-wrap software.

    4 -- Eliminate patents for software. Copyright protection is nearly automatic, favors the small developer compared to patents, and would eliminate a large cost of software development.

    5 -- Encourage other governments to follow a similar set of reasonable rules.

    My personal comments on these rules follow.

    Microsoft might actually have to innovate to provide enough value to make consumers but software within the shortened copyright period.

    Maybe Borland would revert to like a book license agreements -- in fact, that sounds like a good criteria to be included under point 3 above

    Linux -- no damage here, if its all about freedom for the developer and consumer, Linux would be unaffected directly, although stiffer competition from a revitalized commercial sector may inspire more insanely great software here too.
    • require Microsoft (and other software companies) to make abandonware revert to free-use by anyone.

      This is inane. Are you claiming that with the release of XP, Windows ME should be free??

      The rest of your comments are just ill-conceived anti-market pap. Employing rules as you describe them would wipe out the commercial software business as we know it in ten years.

  • Ten years ago, relatively few people knew how to operate a computer, and they were more expensive. A generation from now, almost everyone will know how to use a computer and they will be even more accessible than they are today.

    The "digital divide" will clear itself up. Computers are not really as ubiquitous as people tend to think , especially in low-income areas. That will change though. Until then, I think we have better things to worry about than getting internet access to John Q. Welfare and his kids.

    - Zach.

  • It's the poors fault... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm sorry, but if education is a priority maybe the white trash and hood rats can stop buying Newport smokes and skittles along with FuBu and Tommy gear.

    A pack of smokes costs $3. A moderate smoker could go over 200 packs a year. Save that, stop eating at taco bell and arby's and you can get an adequate PC.

    I think the notion of giving poor people and downtrodden schools computers to solve their problems is nothing but the usual feel good liberal shit. How is that computer going to make up for you mom smoking crack or your dad being in jail or away with his other kids other moms? Lack of computers will not solve anything. Geting kids in better homes and getting these kids out of failing public schools will help and is proven to help.

    Fuck PC's I don't even think schools should have them until Jr. High.
    • Playstation2, Gamecube and XBox. And if you don't think that so-called "poor" people are out buying these, think again. Most vice-oriented consumption (and yes, video games are essentially a vice) comes out of the pockets of the poor. Do you think its the citizens of Atherton that are paying for all of those WWF pay-per-views???

      Really, anyone who has grown up in a depressed or impoverished area (as I did) will tell you that the beer and cigarettes are never lacking in these areas, and most of them are set up pretty well for home entertainment and other ways to dither away your tax dollars.

      In many ways these people live more comfortably than royalty did a century ago. Its time we quit calling them "poor" and started calling them "less wealthy".

  • The foundation for my existance is not "digital" (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wfrp01 ( 82831 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @11:32PM (#2831073) Journal
    I've spent some time in Morocco. Not a third world country, but certainly not first world either. There are large towns, cities, where the majority of the community shares a phone. (I've been absent a few years, so forgive me if things have changed.)

    Digital divide?! Most people in world don't even have telephones!

    So, the argument goes, we must, with all due haste, do all we can to make sure that anyone anywhere can reach anyone else anywhere, at anytime. We must make all information available to everyone at all times.

    Well, maybe. But, despite my white male American technoliterate sysadmin background, I don't give any of these objectives high priority.

    What is life like, when you can't drive? Can't make ad hominem (sic) social arrangements with your friends across town? Can't keep pace with the gyrations of the NYSE? Well, you probably know your neighbors.

    Answer this: What are your neighbor's names? Where did they grow up? What do they do for a living? What are their ambitions? Are you good friends? Could you, with all of your magical technological sophistication, do something to make their life better? Do you think maybe, if you got to know them, techo-illiterates though they may be, they might be able to make your life better?

    I have a sick number of computers at my disposal. Throw them all in the river, and give me tajine on the mountains overlooking the beaches of Agadir. For all our wizardry, we are still existential infants. Don't let your sophistication get to your head.
    • You address a massive issue. Consumerism, industrialization, modernization, digitalization, all fine ideas. But do they provide any sort of happiness. Fundamentally, a professor of mine once described our desires as the desires of the aristocracy, from a Foucaultian perspective - to own a castle (house), segregate our personal lives from that of those around us, and choose our fate to a tea or tee time. What has happened, perhaps, is that we did not in our individualization ask whether or not the aristocracy was happy.

      From a paleolithic perspective, we are certainly anything but in our element - packs animals that do seasonal hunting and foraging and farming. We turn nowadays to television, and in cases internet, for the elements of our physio-psychology in derth. Yet we are supplementing artificial inventions for natural (presumably natural) environments.

      One case in point is a family of refugees where I live here in Canada, a man from Berundi and his wife. The man's ex-wife was killed, and some of his brothers, sisters, cousins, were killed in war, he cannot see his children and cannot afford a vehicle and relies upon donations for essentials. Yet he is the happiest person I have met.

      I enjoyed reading your note on the matter.

  • Digitial Divide is not the Problem (Score:4, Insightful)

    by simm_s ( 11519 ) on Saturday January 12, 2002 @11:39PM (#2831086) Homepage
    Poor people are going to be less likely to own a computer than, richer upper class people. Well Duh?

    I cannot believe people even question the existence of the digital divide, it is something that anyone with reason could understand.

    Why even bother categorizing this problem. There have been disenfranchised people since the day humans stopped hunting and gathering and turned to an agricultural system.

    The problem with this article is that it assumes that the digital divide problem is software related. It is not even a hardware problem. The problem is poverty. Yes I do know that point is obivious! But it is a social problem that world leaders have failed to fight directly.

    The problem is that politians constantly restate the problem of poverty by categorizing diffent it into different subsets. It is as if catogerizing poverty into different subpoints helps solve the problem. I think politicans and civil rights leaders are ill equipped to solve the problem directly, so they divide it into subpoints inorder not to be held accountable for their inablility to fight it.

    A poor kid in the shanty town in South Africa with a computer, is still a poor kid.

    By "bridging digital divide", you do nothing to address what caused the divide in the first place. "Bridging the digital divide" does nothing to affect the infrastructural problems that allow the poverty to exist in the first place. The resources that could be channeled into finding a soultion to poverty, are waisted in a futile effort.

    I bet, when the radio started to overtake written forms of communication, people started to worry that there were not enough radios for everyone. Once the radio problem was solved, TV appeared. When there was a TV in every home, computers appeared an so-on. The problems derived from poverty are dynamic an complex, once you solve one, another appears. To solve only a subset, but not the root, is a futile effort at best.

    We could wire every house in America, but without an infrastructure to support it, it will fall apart. In order fight poverty you have to provide the direct cause of the poverty not the results.

  • Okay, Linux solves the "Cost of the OS" part of the problem, and since it can run on old hardware, it solves tha part of the problem... But who is going to teach these people how to use linux?

    Admit it people, Linux isn't that user friendly. When we are talking about the under-edeucated population, and something that represents a significant cost to these people... they are gonna need a LOT of tech support.

    Heck, I know people who easly afforded their computer, but are afraid to do anything on them for fear of "messing something up".

    I don't think a computer in ever house is the solution. A computer in every classroom, library and community center is the way to go.
    Centralize the computer in these communities, keep them well maintained, and free for all.

    --T
  • Do you really want to give low income families access to computers and the internet? A welfare family gets a computer with an internet connection- is that going provide motivation for this family to get off thier ass and get a job? No, its going to give them a more entertaining thing to park thier ass at, even better than the TV. The digital world is a nice place, but we need to worry about the real world first. This will get modded down because people won't agree with me, and thats fine.
  • Nymia is on fucking drugs. That is the only way I can seem to figure out the mental mechanations behind this crap. His quotes are retarded, using a quote saying "imagine an America with compitent teachers and boutiful access to information". Yeah well I can imagine it and there would be no digital divide if teachers knew what the fuck they were teaching and had more skills then what is required to currently teach high school and elementary students. There are only a small percentage of teachers who teach a subject they actually have any actual training in. Math and science teachers come from the PE department and English teachers haven't read a book with any more depth than a Danielle Steel novel.

    Secondly the statistics are complete crap. The conclusion is that 10% of people without internet access actually want it. Man some divide, ten percent is little more than a margin or error. Some old computer with Linux hacked onto it is not an easier or cheaper way to get someone on the internet. Linux doesn't have a lower cost than any other OS in the realm of computers. Because you can download the source code doesn't mean shit. A good 99% of people with computers don't even know what the hell source code is, it is of no use at all to them. Complex software requires training. Not equating the cost of support is irresponcible and unconvincing. It is further irresponsible to say that there are X number of users of a piece of software therefore someone has X number of resources for help. That is just retarded. If I use a piece of software I'm not going to write down my phone number so some jackass who doesn't know a microchip from a potato chip can call me and ask me how to defragment his monitor.

    Crap about subsidizing the cost and minimizing the cost of parts and all that is just bad accounting. I hope this guy never hopes to be an MBA. Besides the obvious fact nothing is free, not even putting Linux on a discarded 386 PC clone from yesteryear internet access isn't free. The concept of a free ISP died out because it wasn't economically viable. Even if all somebody had to do was subsidize the cost of ISP service and software support giving free computers to everybody would STILL be uneconomical jackassery. Why should somebody get for free something I have to pay for? If some welfare kid gets a free PC and internet access for doing nothing I want a free PC and internet access for doing nothing. Slashdot needs a story moderating system. I'd rate this -1 Editor of crack.
  • This is a serious question. I have seen poverty in the us. (Go to Arkansas or West Virginia...looks like Calcutta).Does being RAISED in poverty propagate poverty? My mom was NOT rich, not even close. Making minimum wage part time raising 2 kids. I, however, refused to continue in that way of life (it's called greed). So I busted my horns, and am now upperclass. I have also given back, so to speak. What causes people to stay poor? Is it the decisions they make? Is it their education level? Is it their intelligence? I have RARELY seen a genius who is dirt poor (unless they have chosen that). I know quite a few VERY intelligent people, one is a Physicist who lives meagerly, by his OWN choice. He does not consider himself poor.(Although many would). He has High speed internet access but no phone. He couldnt care less. All his needs are met. So, is poverty in the eye of the beholder? He is poor in comparison to Bill Gates. He told me that poverty is when the needs you require are not easily met. All his needs are met, hence he is not poor. So, if someone makes only $15,000 a year, but all their needs are met, are they TRULY poor?
  • while it would solve many monitary issues, a large part of the divide problem is education. unless you've grown up around computers or been schooled in them to a relatively high degree, you're not going to have any idea how to use Linux. regardless of however good the open source GUI is. if a problem arose, which it most likely would, who would fix it? hard to find free help these days if your internet is broken. the only OS i can realistically see working when it comes to usability is the MacOS, but of course there are the money issues there. you have to admit a load of iMac2's would do fabulously in low-income communities were the price tag picked up by some generous donor (perhaps michael bloomberg could have done something useful for citizens with his millions, instead of further contributing to the woes of a bought out political system...but that's another rant altogether.)
  • First you should know that there is a project called Open Economies, run by James Moore. Anyone can join the project [harvard.edu].

    I will just try to spark some discussion, here is a few points to consider followed by my own thoughts on this matter. Open Economies participants will recognise the content of this submission.

    I think theses issues are worth to address to try to find some common ground (or than again, maybe we will not) to take action from.

    1. Is there a gap? What is it then?

    2. Where is the gap? Are we talking about the gap worldwide in developing countries or even on a national level in welfare countries with internal differences and gaps (i e USA or Sweden)?

    3. Should we bridge the gap? (Should you answer no to this question, the rest of the questions may not be useful.)

    4. Do we have a responsibility as humans to brdige the gap? Why / why not?

    5. Are there any negative consequences of bridging the gap? Do we (i e the rich filthy bastards) profit from the differences?

    6. Are there any positive consequences of bridging the gap Do we (again the rich filthy bastards) profit from minimising the differences?

    7. How do we bridge the gap in short time with lack of funds?

    8. How do we bridge the gap in long time with lack of funds?

    9. How do we bridge the gap in long time with lots of funds?

    10. Name one measure you can initiate today to bridge the gap. Will you do it?

    - - -

    I will try to address some issues to get the discussion going. I hope you do not mind me doing this.

    >1. Is there a gap? What is it then?

    Yes. There is a gap in countries and between countries and between continents in respect of:
    1. computers
    2. access
    3. general IT knowledge and
    4. use.

    If one of the factors 1-4 is missing in any given community, the digital gap will eventually evolve. In a community with high rates of 1-4, the digital development will flourish.

    >2. Where is the gap? Are we talking about the gap worldwide in developing >countries or even on a national level in welfare countries with internal >differences and gaps (i e USA or Sweden)?

    I think the gap is relative and could be applied and considered both on a domestic and international level.

    >3. Should we bridge the gap? (Should you answer no to this question, the >rest of the questions may not be useful.)

    I think we should consider the world throught the John Rawls veil of ignorance. Rawls is well-known to all scholars of jurisprudence and most likely all of you, but just to make sure we are on the same page: the basic idea is that the choice of the pinciples of social organisation is to be made by persons who have no idea of the actual position they will occupy in society or of their interests and inclinations. Rawls is wideley critised, maybe best by Nozick, but I still consider his ideas as a good tool and framework for any regulatory or policy discussions.

    Seen through the eyes of Rawls we should bridge the gap at least if we do enjoy the benefits of a digital society.

    >4. Do we have a responsibility as humans to brdige the gap? Why / why not?

    Yes, according to the answer to 3.

    >7. How do we bridge the gap in short time with lack of funds?

    I think we should be very generous with our knowledge. It will not cost us much to set up web sites spreading our knowledge and works to other communities. The open source and free software movement could be the most important step towards digitalisation of Africa. Sweden is one country spending a lot of funds on financial aid directed towards developing countries (often referred to the Group 77 countries). Maybe we and other nations should refocus and educate and ditribute or knowledge instead of cash.

    At the United Nations Millenium Summit the prime minister of India, Shri Vitar Bhapal Vhajpayee stated:

    "A 'New Economy' drives the world today. Yet, nearly a quarter of the people this Assembly represents have neither prospered nor gained from these developments. Often,they find themselves further marginalised and more vulnerable as development economics gives way to unbridled market economics and social objectives are erased by profit motives."

    >8. How do we bridge the gap in long time with lack of funds?

    Actually, the same answer as 7. We also probably could donate a lot of outranged equipment to the Group 77 countries or to less fortunate people in our own contries.

    >9. How do we bridge the gap in long time with lots of funds?

    I think we should address these issues through the United Nations or a similar organisation and fund a special program aiming to wire the world.

    >10. Name one measure you can initiate today to bridge the gap. Will you do it?

    I have translated the GNU GPL v 2 into Swedish, which - to my surprise - was very much appreciated by Swedes lacking knowledge of the English language. If you are not a programmer, easy things like this could actually improve the world, although it may seem simple and naive on the verge to pathetic. I have also published some of my works online, which has turned out to be helpful to a few people. It is not a huge effort, but if we all do something it could have some impact. You do not have to go into Pay it forward-sleazy movies extremes .-)

    My new task will be to write easy to grasp guidelines to use computers with free software or open source software. It will cost me a few hours, but hopefully someone will be helped.

    If you read this far, I am very impressed. Thank you for your attention.

    Best Regards

    Mikael

  • La-La Land LLamas & Harsh Realities (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jeppe Salvesen ( 101622 ) on Sunday January 13, 2002 @07:01AM (#2831896)
    The reality of the matter is that even if you provide poor people with internet access, they are unlikely to use it in any way beneficial to themselves and their lives.

    Take a look at all the factors keeping them down (and I do realize that there are causal factors in play that to a large extent excuse their behavior) - crime, alcoholism/drug abuse, abusive parents, gangs, lack of jobs and corrupt government, along with general bureaucracy that raises the bar for starting your own business.

    Now ask yourself : what will the internet provide that a library doesn't for these people? or discussing with your peers at a café?

    And finally look at library usage in poor areas. Then look at how many of them watch Jerry Springer and Ricki Lake, and not the news or PBS. Are you sure Linux or bridging the Digital Divide can do anything to help this?

Slashdot Top Deals

Order and simplification are the first steps toward mastery of a subject -- the actual enemy is the unknown. -- Thomas Mann

Close