Slashdot Mirror
20% of U.S. Population Has Never Used Email
Ezratrumpet writes "A recent PC World article notes that 20 percent of the U.S. population has never sent an email. Does this number over- or underestimate the actual number of people who know nothing of email? What are the implications of this statistic to our society? Or are these people just Luddites who mourned the demise of the telegraph and have also never used a telephone?"
From TFA: "Many people just don't see a reason to use computers and do not associate technology with the needs and demands of their daily lives," Barrett said. Shocker.
20% of America doesn't use e-mail because they don't have anything to say via e-mail. Consider the same logic with regard to first posts ;)
"Or are these people just Luddites who mourned the demise of the telegraph and have also never used a telephone?"
Its that sort of arrogant crap that makes people vow to never use a computer. Some people have no need for a particular tech. I NEVER send text messages, they seem a waste of time. I don't use RSS and have no idea what twitter is. I never use myspace and don't have a facebook page.
So fucking sue me.
This infantile attitude of "I use tech X and thus so should you" just shows the immaturity of the poster, not that they are in any sense 'better' than those not using that technology.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
The article says that it was a phone survey. This means: 1: The people are obviously not "Luddites who mourned the demise of the telegraph and have also never used a telephone", since they used a phone to answer the survey questions. 2: Most of the tech-savvy people I know don't even have land lines. They use cell phones or things like Skype, which are difficult to survey for various reasons. The people who go those routes have generally used email. Therefore, the sample population was already skewed toward people who wouldn't have used email anyway.
To put this into some form of perspective, strange here on Slashdot I know, but in reality for most people internet became a potential reality around 1998 (AOL going onto the internet from its walled garden) or at best 1996. So maybe another way to look at this study would be
From zero to 80% in 10/12/15 years, how the US has embraced email
Sure lots of the people here on Slashdot might have had an email account in the 80s, but that is an insignificant minority. I actually think that it is pretty impressive at 80% penetration given some of the literacy issues in the US education system.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
How about over 60?
These groups are overwhelmingly not emailers (yes I know a few members of either of these groups will trump up "I do" - you've self-selected so you're not representative)
Once you take these groups out, you probably have about 80% of the population. I'd have to say that I doubt if all, or even close to all, the remainder have used email. Therefore I assume the total of never-emailed is higher than the 20% cited.
However, in the grand scheme of things, so what? People can lead full and happy lives without technology. Hard as it may be for the tech-obessed to even consider it, not everyone is like them.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Why are people who see no need to have a computer being called Luddites? I don't know that any of these people are opposed to progress, they simply don't have access to email equipment or don't use email even if they have access.
My mom and dad are definitely not Luddites, my mom used to be a Cobol programmer and my dad taught me electronics when I was small; they simply don't see any need for a computer in their home. They have cell phones, a 5.1 channel sound system, and DirectTV; but no computer.
When people see no need for televisions in their homes, should they also be called Luddites?
Just as a side: When I wrote this I did so in humor, but it does hold an element of interest. People who have never used e-mail are going to be far more susceptible to scams that those who have used e-mail have become well aware of and learned to ignore. The art will be in perpetrating them over forms such as SMS, which allows only short messages, successfully. I would say 1/5 people a reasonably large target population.
The summary, even leaving aside its tone, is flawed in that it seems to presuppose this is by choice.
I think people underestimate the amount of poverty - even in the US, where the official definition of poor still most often includes obesity, a car, 2 televisions, airconditioning, and other things seen as luxuries across most of the world.
If you have a family of 4, and are making a combined income of ~$30k/year, and have payments to make for housing/car/food/medical, you might be stretching to pay the PHONE bill much less have luxury money to spend on frivolities like a web connection. And yes, they are frivolities: if all of your friends are in similar financial circumstances, you have even less incentive because they aren't going to be online EITHER. Finally, even the web is squeezing these folks out - browsing by modem SUCKS, and it seems that more and more sites are building fancy flash front-ends that take minutes to d/l at modem speeds.
-Styopa
Those of us around IT don't always see them regularly, but remember, 16-17% of the population just aren't that smart. And per another comment, 1% are in jail. I saw a college alumni survey about a decade ago and email use really dropped over about the age of 55 -- which I guess now might extrapolate to 65? Lot of Americans over 65. Lot of Americans at the poverty level as well.
Admittedly, many of these factors are coexistent but 20% sounds really good all things considered.
I need to clarify, because in rereading that I noticed how little information that conveys.
The target demographic in these scams (especially with the added consideration of SMS-spam) are:
a) the older folks who could REALLY USE a few (nevermind a few HUNDRED) extra thousand to get by
b) teenagers using mommy and daddy's bank account, thinking they are 'the slick'
c) the dirt poor, who have seen black market dealings all their life, and know a good con can pay off sometimes (low value target)
d) idiots
Most people belonging to any of those groups see $200K as a goldmine. Hell, I know what money's really worth, and would STILL jump at a chance to catch $200,000; not to the point of forgetting what lying deceitful creatures humans can be though.
My first thought was that there are probably 10-15% of the older generation in our society as well. I don't have the numbers, but you could probably conclude, based on the average age of death around 70, that 1/8th (12.5%) of the population is age 60-70+, 12.5% would be in the 50-59, etc. This would mean that the folks living to 80/90+ would factor in to the retired and enjoying their camping, fishing, knitting, and whatever else people do when they retire instead of sitting in front of a PC all day.
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.