Universal Access

Universal Access to computing and the Net is edging closer to reality. One company after another is now offering computing equipment and Net access to new employees. enRamp announced last week that it's offering a program to provide complete technology benefits to associates and their families. This is definitely a great moral (and business) idea whose time is coming. (Read More).

Universal Access to computing and the Net is becoming a reality, at least for some middle and working-class Americans, rather than the pipedream it was even a few years ago.

Among the sometimes arrogant techno-elite, the expense and complexity of going online is continuously trivialized, dismissed. But corporations seem to grasp how how critical it is for their employees -- and their kids and spouses -- to have Net access. And they?re making it happen.

Last year, the Ford Motor Company became the first major corporation to announce that it would provide computers, monitors and Net access to all its employees and members of their families, worldwide.

The Intel Corp. said that it would also give its employees home PC's plus Net access. Delta and American Airlines quickly followed. Intel actually topped Ford's better idea by providing PC's plus Internet access for its employees. Delta and American Airlines quickly followed suit. Intel topped Ford's offer by providing its workers with PC's that feature a 667-megahertz Pentium III, 128 megabytes, 32 megs of video RAM and a 20-gigabyte hard drive, plus a 17-inch monitor, a printer, a bundle of "productivity software" and a video-conferencing camera. Perhaps shamed by the fact that a car company trumped the tech industry, Intel even threw in each employee's choice of one computer-connected toy for the new Intel playline.

Friday, enRamp announced a new corporate affinity program that would enable businesses and other organizations to provide technology benefits, including complete computing packages to associates and their families. The idea of computing as an employee benefit is also significant. The enRamp program allows participants to obtain PC's by paying monthly charges of $24.95 or less over a three-year period, deducted from paychecks or organization dues.

Hardware aside, there's an enormous political idea here. Computers are increasingly becoming seen as a right, not just an expensive commercial, social or recreational appliance. Such companies like Ford see that access to computing can enhance morale and loyalty, facilitate corporate communications, transcend geographic boundaries, and even benefit family life, since many global employees and their kids would not be able to afford computers otherwise.

Ford and Intel get it.

This is good for the country, and great news for the tech industry: Universal Access, if it really catches, means staggeringly huge sales of computers, software and bandwidth to private companies, educational systems, perhaps even government agencies.

Universal Access is that rarest of social phenomena, the win-win issue. Except for moral guardians clucking about pornography and violent video games, who could really oppose it?: It can advance technology while it helps eliminate potentially bitter social divisions, upgrades literacy, education and research, liberates information, enhances democracy, strengthens community. Some companies even believes if strengthens family ties. It would make the Net a universal business, educational and social tool, rather than a network for the affluent, educated and technologically-inclined it is now.

Universal Access is one of the most unambivalently moral issues relating to technology and contemporary society. It helps fulfill the real promise of technology --- to bring information to everyone on the planet. Not to take anything away from the sweatshop issue, it's hard to think of a cause that would do more for the disadvantaged right here at home. While middle-class Americans are hooking up to the Net like mad, poor Americans aren't. Nor has most of the underdeveloped world. Without Universal Access, they will soon be hating the technologically-connected (especially the American variety) who monopolize and dominate the new technologies driving the global economy.

It's interesting that corporations, of all entities, rather than educational or political institutions (colleges and universities rarely provide personal computers to students taking these strides). Business grasps that internal communications networks, interconnected business environments and systems that involve the whole family are good for business. That they are, in fact, potentially good for everybody.

This will raise some interesting political issues as well, especially in countries with Ford workers but without protected freedom of speech. Since access to the Net makes censorship virtually impossible, countries with foreign workers working for companies like Ford will be under increased pressure to wire up.

So Universal Access inches towards reality. Although only a handful of companies have yet offered their workers full Net access and computing equipment, it seems inevitable that others will follow, if for no other reason that to stay competitive in a tight labor market.

Universal Access to computers doesn't guarantee any sort of social or techno-utopia, but would spread free speech and bring ideas like online voting closer. It will surely bring even bigger changes in retailing, e-trading, online entertainment and communication along with pressure to resolve the host of legal conflicts arising over patents and copyright. Every computer user could shop globally, every retailer sell all over the planet.

The designers of the Net (read C.J.R. Licklider and Jon Postel) fantasized that the computer network would become a universal educational and information tool. Mostly because of class and other factors, that hasn't happened. Universal Access might make it so.

Comments

Ford can F off.

[Jon Peterson]

Yes, it would be nice if net access existed universally as an infrastructure layer in the same way as paved roads, electricity, gas, drainage, and freshwater do.

Net access isn't as important as these. Look how few people in the world have access to any of the above. Depressing, isn't it?

Furthermore, how would I like it if Ford provided me with electricity, Ford built the road between my house and the factory, and Ford supplied me with fresh water.

No f***ing way would I like it not one little bit. If net access really is this vital layer that like sanitation, street lighting, and chlorinated water will pull civilisation into the next era then I ABSOLUTLEY DO NOT WANT IT CONTROLLED BY CORPORATIONS.

On the other hand if net access is just a way for the rich and the poor of the west to waste their time and money on sterile information and pointless shopping, then hey roll on McAmerica, give the the huddled masses peecees and bandwidth, all for free, nothing to lose but your minds.

"Every computer user could shop globally, every retailer sell all over the planet. "

Yeah nice idea. This is where the rich people on the nice side of the world buy stuff made by the other side of the world. Then, they go on holiday to the poor side and come back to tell all their rich friends how much better the poor side is but what a shame its being spoilt by all those factories and poor people with no rights.

But do you want universal access by company PC ?

[Koos]

Ok, first of all I like being net.connected all of the time. Forget dialin, go leased line.

But: getting universal access from your employer makes you dependend on that employer for access. And what if you use that access in a way your employer disagrees with. What if you post opinions (in your free time) that offend others who contact your ISP about it (your employer? Or an ISP who forwards this to your employer?). Or what if you want to post something about your own company (whistleblowing ?) that could get you fired. First case I can think of is the Northwest searching employees home computers because they were suspected of being involved in actions against Northwest.

I have been asked to remove stuff on a website totally not related to my job because a user could get there from the homepage of my employer with a number of clicks so the remarks I made there could be seen as being a negative comment on working at my current job (and this in .nl where people are expected to have a life outside work). One reason I am separating my 'being active on Internet' from my work address/webservers.