3 ms·

Most of today's kids, yes. Not all of them. Lots and lots of low-income families don't have access to these things, and it's naive to think otherwise.

• cma 17y ago
  There are few people without access to the libraries with computers. (edit: in the U.S.)
  • pixelcort 17y ago
    Perhaps, but how many libraries in the U.S. would allow installation of developer tools on their machines? Furthermore, if all the machine has IE6, web-based developer tools might be limited as well.
  • samdk 17y ago
    Access to a computer in a library is very often time limited and you're almost always limited in what you can do on the computer. It's good that people can use library computers, but it's absolutely not the same thing as having your own computer.
• shrughes 17y ago
  Most people in the world don't have these things. They don't have a lot of things. Redistributing between some Americans and other Americans hardly does anything to reduce inequality, and it's naive to think otherwise.
• yardie 17y ago
  As the offspring of one of those low-income families I reject your argument. Low-income families are incredibly resourceful. I also went to schools where the majority of students were low-income and the schoolboard still managed to install and network computers. Some students used them, most did not. Just saying there should be more access to computers is pretty useless because with no desire to use one it's just an expensive paperweight (facebook terminal). Trust me, if those low-income students wanted a computer they could get one. We have 20 years of computer spare computer parts. There are enough computers produced to give to every person on the planet. The bigger problem was how to use them. This was one of the goals of the OLPC program before it got caught in a proxy war with netbooks.