3 ms·

The free market and the march of technological progress did a better job than any moonshot project designed to solve digital literacy in poor countries. Many su

The free market and the march of technological progress did a better job than any moonshot project designed to solve digital literacy in poor countries. Many sub-Saharan and Southeast Asian countries have better LTE rollout than rural America does. Everyone has a smartphone or tablet, made possible by the fact that cheap Android devices are really cheap but still effective. And that's because the free market doesn't care about the opinions of a bunch of committee members who all want a say in how the device is designed. It doesn't have the luxury of endless nonprofit grants. Devices either fulfill needs and make money or they don't and company goes broke. Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop, doesn't mean they don't have access to the Internet for what they need.

scroot 5y ago
> Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop, doesn't mean they don't have access to the Internet for what they need. True enough. But can we seriously call such activity "digital literacy"? What is "literate" about it?
sdenton4 5y ago
I actually think the OLPC was a big step in making computers more accessible. Netbooks were entirely a response to the OLPC, when companies like Asus noticed that there was a gaping, totally unserved market for low-end notebooks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_PC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_PC These netbooks (and especially imitators running Windows that came soon after the eeepc) were very commonplace - especially amongst university students - when I was living in East Africa in the early 2010's. They were, as you say, really cheap and effective enough. Eventually phones have caught up for many use cases, but they certainly weren't there at the time...
- e4e78a06 5y ago
  Their market penetration for the general population definitely wasn't great though. A big reason IMO was they didn't have a cellular data connection and cell infra hadn't yet been sufficiently developed with good speed and coverage. 2G/3G pretty much universally sucked even in its later forms. Also speaking as someone who used netbooks throughout my time in K-12 ed, they were woefully underpowered and laggy compared to today's low end smartphones. A $80 Xiaomi phone can probably run most websites/apps at 60 fps, a 11 inch netbook with crappy internal HDD/EMMC and single core Atom, not so much.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop" Okay, can you write a book, programm an arguino, produce a song, calculate in a spreadsheets expected payments for your mortgage, design layout of your house, map out your farm for planting? No, not really. They have devices that enable them to consume and feed the disguisting add industry and suvaliance machine, not to create.
- e4e78a06 5y ago
  You can do all of the above on an Android tablet actually. Maybe you can't do all types of programming but you can definitely write a book, produce a song, use spreadsheets, and work with maps.
  - musicale 5y ago
    Pretty sure there are Arduino IDEs for Android.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    and the software has 1/10th the capabilities of it's desktop equivalent, and the experience is terrible. HN people commenting here live in a fantasy world
    - e4e78a06 5y ago
      You have no internet access in sub-Saharan Africa with a traditional laptop. 4G LTE USB dongles basically don't exist or they're as expensive as a cheap Android phone. WiFi and copper to the home isn't widespread in developing countries. Without the internet you have no ability to learn whatever you want or communicate with anyone. It's you that's living in a fantasy world. Why don't you try using a laptop without internet, or with intermittent internet access, for a month and then come back and see how productive you were?
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        "Why don't you try using a laptop without internet, or with intermittent internet access, for a month and then come back and see how productive you were?" I did that for 5 years
salawat 5y ago
>The free market and the march of technological progress did a better job than any moonshot project designed to solve digital literacy in poor countries. Yeaaaaah. You know that had nothing to do with actually increasing digital literacy, and was actually directed at tapping into previously unexploitable markets right? That mobile and telecom was realized before roads and secure ubiquitous access to potable water is not something that is impressive to someone whose sat through company meetings gushing over the value to be raked in by fee extracting developing markets. >Many sub-Saharan and Southeast Asian countries have better LTE rollout than rural America does. Population density does that. >Everyone has a smartphone or tablet, made possible by the fact that cheap Android devices are really cheap but still effective. And that's because the free market doesn't care about the opinions of a bunch of committee members who all want a say in how the device is designed. Android is also one of the most user-hostile computing platforms I've ever encountered, and I shudder to think of the people who have to tread their "first exposure to computers" being Android, then working their way back to a General Purpose computer. Android was never built as anything but a developer's portal to population of users. Nothing more. A general purpose computer, at least has utility as a springboard to conventions from which to bridge the gap to more special purpose computing regimes. Something, I might add, that that committee you disparage was more keenly interested in providing cheaply, robustly, and maintainable than any developer or architect of Android, or the handsets it runs on ever was. >Devices either fulfill needs and make money or they don't and company goes broke. Some problems don't lend themselves to profitable solutions. Free markets optimized around immediate profit potential essentially bury and write these problems out of the equation until there is simply no other choice, which is not guaranteed to be the optimal course of action in the long run. >Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop, doesn't mean they don't have access to the Internet for what they need. Correction: They can use the Internet for what someone deemed profitable to make available for them. The use cases that were not (General Purpose) remain out of reach. It irks me when people don't fully render the positive and negative aspects of an implementation.
- e4e78a06 5y ago
  > Yeaaaaah. You know that had nothing to do with actually increasing digital literacy, and was actually directed at tapping into previously unexploitable markets right? That's the point. The market trying to make money does a better job at getting tech access to people than specialized initiatives to promote digital literacy. > Population density does that. The point was that the standard wire-to-the-home plus WiFi router plus laptop model that we have in the developed world doesn't work if you're trying to build out infrastructure for a large number of people cheaply. > Something, I might add, that that committee you disparage was more keenly interested in providing cheaply, robustly, and maintainable than any developer or architect of Android, or the handsets it runs on ever was The first step to learning to access the internet is not learning how to code. Smartphones aren't exactly competing with laptops - you can first get a phone or tablet and when you go to university or into the workplace you have a proper PC. > Correction: They can use the Internet for what someone deemed profitable to make available for them. The use cases that were not (General Purpose) remain out of reach. Android devices are capable of running arbitrary code through sideloading, including JIT compiled apps like emulators. About the only thing you can't do is boot your own OS, which by the time you know enough to boot your own OS you definitely have your own laptop. You are referring to iOS.

scroot 5y ago

> Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop, doesn't mean they don't have access to the Internet for what they need. True enough. But can we seriously call such activity "digital literacy"? What is "literate" about it?

sdenton4 5y ago

I actually think the OLPC was a big step in making computers more accessible. Netbooks were entirely a response to the OLPC, when companies like Asus noticed that there was a gaping, totally unserved market for low-end notebooks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_PC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_PC These netbooks (and especially imitators running Windows that came soon after the eeepc) were very commonplace - especially amongst university students - when I was living in East Africa in the early 2010's. They were, as you say, really cheap and effective enough. Eventually phones have caught up for many use cases, but they certainly weren't there at the time...

e4e78a06 5y ago
Their market penetration for the general population definitely wasn't great though. A big reason IMO was they didn't have a cellular data connection and cell infra hadn't yet been sufficiently developed with good speed and coverage. 2G/3G pretty much universally sucked even in its later forms. Also speaking as someone who used netbooks throughout my time in K-12 ed, they were woefully underpowered and laggy compared to today's low end smartphones. A $80 Xiaomi phone can probably run most websites/apps at 60 fps, a 11 inch netbook with crappy internal HDD/EMMC and single core Atom, not so much.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

"Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop" Okay, can you write a book, programm an arguino, produce a song, calculate in a spreadsheets expected payments for your mortgage, design layout of your house, map out your farm for planting? No, not really. They have devices that enable them to consume and feed the disguisting add industry and suvaliance machine, not to create.

e4e78a06 5y ago
You can do all of the above on an Android tablet actually. Maybe you can't do all types of programming but you can definitely write a book, produce a song, use spreadsheets, and work with maps.
- musicale 5y ago
  Pretty sure there are Arduino IDEs for Android.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  and the software has 1/10th the capabilities of it's desktop equivalent, and the experience is terrible. HN people commenting here live in a fantasy world
  - e4e78a06 5y ago
    You have no internet access in sub-Saharan Africa with a traditional laptop. 4G LTE USB dongles basically don't exist or they're as expensive as a cheap Android phone. WiFi and copper to the home isn't widespread in developing countries. Without the internet you have no ability to learn whatever you want or communicate with anyone. It's you that's living in a fantasy world. Why don't you try using a laptop without internet, or with intermittent internet access, for a month and then come back and see how productive you were?
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      "Why don't you try using a laptop without internet, or with intermittent internet access, for a month and then come back and see how productive you were?" I did that for 5 years

salawat 5y ago

>The free market and the march of technological progress did a better job than any moonshot project designed to solve digital literacy in poor countries. Yeaaaaah. You know that had nothing to do with actually increasing digital literacy, and was actually directed at tapping into previously unexploitable markets right? That mobile and telecom was realized before roads and secure ubiquitous access to potable water is not something that is impressive to someone whose sat through company meetings gushing over the value to be raked in by fee extracting developing markets. >Many sub-Saharan and Southeast Asian countries have better LTE rollout than rural America does. Population density does that. >Everyone has a smartphone or tablet, made possible by the fact that cheap Android devices are really cheap but still effective. And that's because the free market doesn't care about the opinions of a bunch of committee members who all want a say in how the device is designed. Android is also one of the most user-hostile computing platforms I've ever encountered, and I shudder to think of the people who have to tread their "first exposure to computers" being Android, then working their way back to a General Purpose computer. Android was never built as anything but a developer's portal to population of users. Nothing more. A general purpose computer, at least has utility as a springboard to conventions from which to bridge the gap to more special purpose computing regimes. Something, I might add, that that committee you disparage was more keenly interested in providing cheaply, robustly, and maintainable than any developer or architect of Android, or the handsets it runs on ever was. >Devices either fulfill needs and make money or they don't and company goes broke. Some problems don't lend themselves to profitable solutions. Free markets optimized around immediate profit potential essentially bury and write these problems out of the equation until there is simply no other choice, which is not guaranteed to be the optimal course of action in the long run. >Just because they don't do computing like _you_ do, using a laptop, doesn't mean they don't have access to the Internet for what they need. Correction: They can use the Internet for what someone deemed profitable to make available for them. The use cases that were not (General Purpose) remain out of reach. It irks me when people don't fully render the positive and negative aspects of an implementation.

e4e78a06 5y ago
> Yeaaaaah. You know that had nothing to do with actually increasing digital literacy, and was actually directed at tapping into previously unexploitable markets right? That's the point. The market trying to make money does a better job at getting tech access to people than specialized initiatives to promote digital literacy. > Population density does that. The point was that the standard wire-to-the-home plus WiFi router plus laptop model that we have in the developed world doesn't work if you're trying to build out infrastructure for a large number of people cheaply. > Something, I might add, that that committee you disparage was more keenly interested in providing cheaply, robustly, and maintainable than any developer or architect of Android, or the handsets it runs on ever was The first step to learning to access the internet is not learning how to code. Smartphones aren't exactly competing with laptops - you can first get a phone or tablet and when you go to university or into the workplace you have a proper PC. > Correction: They can use the Internet for what someone deemed profitable to make available for them. The use cases that were not (General Purpose) remain out of reach. Android devices are capable of running arbitrary code through sideloading, including JIT compiled apps like emulators. About the only thing you can't do is boot your own OS, which by the time you know enough to boot your own OS you definitely have your own laptop. You are referring to iOS.