Slashdot Mirror


Who Is Getting Left Behind In the Internet Revolution? (sciencemag.org)

Reader sciencehabit writes: The internet is often hailed as a liberating technology. No matter who you are or what kind of country you live in, your voice can be amplified online and heard around the world. But that assumes that people can get on the internet in the first place. Research has shown that poverty and remoteness can prevent people from getting online, but a new study out today also shows that just belonging to a politically marginalized group can translate to poorer access. The study, published online today in Science, provides the first global map of the people being left behind by the internet revolution. Mapping the internet is hard. Although it is true that every computer with a connection has a real-world location, no one actually knows where they all are. Rather than being organized top-down, the world's computers are connected to each other by a bushy, redundant network of servers. Each country builds and maintains its own infrastructure for connecting citizens to the wider internet. The decision to expand and maintain the infrastructure in one region and not another is up to those in power. And therein lies the problem: Ethnic and religious minorities who are excluded from their country's political process may also be systematically excluded from the global internet.

63 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. In other news by avandesande · · Score: 1

    Poor people politically marginalized. Details at 11.....

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:In other news by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      See North Korea for example. It isn't poverty, it is politics.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  2. The lucky ones!!! by unixisc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who Is Getting Left Behind In the Internet Revolution?

    The lucky ones }:-)

    (runs & hides)

    1. Re:The lucky ones!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I definitely agree. Been in IT my whole life (even before they paid me for it) - I become more luddite every day. Especially every day I read "appy apps for appy app apps".

      The older I get, the more I do my job that supports the IoT, but take that money and get off the grid as far as I possibly can.

      No one's voice is really heard these days, there's just more noise. Not everyone is getting a sudden global platform with a direct line to Obama. Internet COULD connect you to everyone does not mean it DOES.

    2. Re:The lucky ones!!! by fbobraga · · Score: 2

      the net is just another form of communication (and a powerful one!): most people are learning that yet

    3. Re:The lucky ones!!! by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      Agreed. It's more like dipping for statistical data or pieces of information to use to one's advantage (Confirmation Bias) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      It can be used to search for self-affirmation for stress reduction - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... , also tied tightly with The Cheerleader Effect - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... .

      In-group Bias - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... , ending in Self-Serving Bias - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... , with Group Attribution Error - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... cooked in when desired.

      The list goes on and on and on... It comes down to 1.) I know I'm right, right? 1a.) I know I'm right, and I'll find shit to prove it. 1b.) I know I'm wrong but I can find shit to prove I'm right. 2.) I don't know. I'll find what I want and use the first thing I find to determine my research path (this is GREAT for online distraction and use of ADD to pop something into someone's head). 2a.) I don't know. I'll see what my friends think about it. 2b). I don't know. I feel like an idiot, so I'll go with the group think and have others to back me up. 2c.) I don't know. Why don't I know? I need to find others that don't know so I don't look dumb. 3.) I'm bored. I need to find something to get involved in to see something get hurt or changed so I can say I'm part of it. 3a.) I'm bored. I'll see what's going on so I can back others up, so I can see some nice hurt or damange to some[thing|one] else so I can feel better about my situation. 3b.) I'm bored. I'll go find something to make me feel less bored, so I can feel less lazy or depressed. 4.) Wow, there are so many variations of all of these that I can't possibly complete this in a way that someone else won't disagree, agree, or try to correct errors in to look like they're [smarter|better|more attractive]. :)

  3. Putting it into Perspective. by BrendaEM · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Internet is expensive for everyone. As a thought experiment, divide what you make by $11,880, the poverty line, and then multiply your internet bill is by that much. In other words, if you make the average US income of: 53,657, you end up with a poverty harshness factor of: 4.516582491582492. Now multiply your internet bill by that much, such as the average internet bill of $45. You end up with an poverty adjusted bill of $203.24. That is not insignificant. In reality it's much worse. My phone is my 3rd most expensive thing after housing for which there is no HUD help, and food, for which I can't get foodstamps. I am below the poverty line.

    [I tried to submit an article stating that California's phone credit program isn't working, but it never made it, like almost all the others I posted.]

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by jimmifett · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would I need to "poverty adjust" my internet bill?

      To see how much it would cost me if I were poor? I've been poor, didn't really tickle my jigglies much. Worked hard, saved harder, educated myself harder still. Now my kid has no idea what growing up poor is like, so I make her work hard and study hard like an asian parent, an A- is unacceptable.

    2. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you live in the US, poverty is not unavoidable. It is usually a consequence of your own actions. Yes, I know there are exceptions, but I'm pretty sure you can find a way to make more than $11,800 per year.

      I know this because I started out poor. I moved to Houston with all of my possessions in an old Pontiac Sunbird. I found roommates to help with rent. I worked hard, and didn't buy things I couldn't afford.

      Nowadays, I have more money than I need, but I still live by the same principles of working hard, not over-spending, and setting money aside for a rainy day. In 30 years as an adult, I have yet to buy a brand new car or an $800 cell phone. But I'm very blessed.

      Now, my sons are starting down the same path. They don't make much money yet, but they are learning life's lessons, that things don't get handed to you, you have to work for them. My 21-year-old son moved out of our house this year after finding "real" work, even though he doesn't have a college education. He makes enough to pay his own rent, and all his own living expenses. He isn't looking for a HUD voucher or any other kind of handout.

      By the way, there is free Internet in every public library. And you can find perfectly capable Android smartphones for $100 or less. You can use those to look for your first real job, so you can afford your own internet, and a brand-name smartphone, if that's what you want.

    3. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by BrendaEM · · Score: 1, Troll

      Some of the poor have disabilities.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    4. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by BrendaEM · · Score: 2

      I think it's prudent to have a cellphone for emergencies. And much commerce and mapping is done on the internet.

      You spend about as much clothes than I do in a year. I get about half of my clothes 2nd hand.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    5. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by BrendaEM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You would want to poverty adjust a bill to consider the impact it would have on someone with lesser means. Below a certain amount of income, it is very difficult to get by, and even harder to rise. I am not saying it doesn't happen, but the American Dream is too often just a dream, and the reality is that we live in a country where poverty is a crime. We live in a country where it is illegal to be homeless, or dollar-less. It is illegal to sleep in your car.

      BTW, here in Silicon Valley, often I see a certain middle age man walk by and take food out of the trash to eat it. Even though, I don't have much, I've tried to offer to buy him a bagel or something, but he refuses.

      When I was young, we went hungry at times, but I did not starve.

      I have a friend who used to eat from McDonalds's dumpster when he was hungry.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    6. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      2 - how can you (or anyone) rent/own for $271/month?

      3 - why do you group clothing with misc? Bizarre.

      14 - get pay as you go phones from, for example, T-Mobile for as little as $10/year. Also, consider Ting.com

      15 - where do you get Internet for $25/month? Is it broadband?

      --
      I come here for the love
    7. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To see how much it would cost me if I were poor? I've been poor, didn't really tickle my jigglies much. Worked hard, saved harder, educated myself harder still. Now my kid has no idea what growing up poor is like, so I make her work hard and study hard like an asian parent, an A- is unacceptable.

      I've been poor too. As in no-eating-for-a-few-days-because-there's-no-money poor, and an automobile was a luxury. I did not like it at all.

      Successful now. But I grew up in a small town where everyone had to go to the same schools - rich or poor. There wasn't a big enough population to divide people or support private schools. Same with the neighborhoods, there wasn't really any bad ones and I freely could come and go as I pleased.

      What if I didn't have that advantage? Say I grew up poor in a large city, where the only public school was a failing one, and private schools were unattainable? Where the neighborhood was so unsafe I couldn't have easily traveled to my local library like I did?

      People still climb out of such a poverty trap like that, but they are rare. Would I have been one of the lucky ones? Or would the poor education have held me back, consigned me to menial jobs?

      I don't know.

      Even with my success, I've noticed my values are different. I drive 10 year old vehicles, buy clothes at the thrift store, and tend to be paranoid about making sure there's plenty of food in the house. I tend not to consume much, and when I do, its from the lower end of the spectrum - think a cheap cell phone on a cheap plan, an old small TV, no cable, etc. Not necessarily a bad thing, but I know poverty shaped my way of thinking. And that's with being in a good neighborhood with good schools. What if I grew up in a neighborhood where drugs were being openly sold and people died on the sidewalk, where poverty and low-paying jobs were the norm?

      What would my values have been, and what I have accepted as normal?

    8. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by owlstead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "If you live in the US, poverty is not unavoidable. It is usually a consequence of your own actions."

      Ah, yes, the American dream. You already said it yourself: "But I'm very blessed.". Not all people are.

      Saying that everybody can get out of the trap is non-sense. It may be very invigorating for you to think so, but in the end you're turning it around.

      That you made it doesn't mean that everybody else can. Do you really think the *because they want to be*, because they are lazy, because they are quitters?

      Just for fun, draw up a list of all the things that could have stopped you achieving what you did. You might find life is even better than you expected. You'll hopefully also see that your life cannot be lived by everybody else.

    9. Re: Putting it into Perspective. by tepples · · Score: 1

      Moving itself has a cost.

    10. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Feeling blessed is an attitude, not a circumstance. It is a way of saying that I'm grateful to God for life, and for living in a country that rewards hard work.

      If you believe you can't do better, you certainly won't. Many people who are poor are indeed poor because they are lazy or quitters. I recognize that there are people who have true disabilities or major problems that cause them to be poor, through no fault of their own, but this is the exception, not the rule.

      I work with young people in an inner city neighborhood of Houston. I'm there to show them that they CAN achieve more, if they just want it and work for it. Some of them are showing signs of promise, but others continue to make the same bad choices that will lead to repeating their parents' lives of poverty. These behaviors are clearly visible, even in school age children.

      I had many obstacles on my own way to a "successful" life. My parents lived well below the poverty line. Nobody came to my neighborhood with HUD vouchers or food stamps. Nobody gave me job training classes. I had to go after it, to want it, to work for it.

      Everybody has things that "stop" them from achieving. Whining about obstacles doesn't help. Instead, start finding ways to achieve your goals despite those obstacles!

    11. Re: Putting it into Perspective. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      There isn't anywhere where the cost of living is $11,880, not even in the most rural and poor parts of the country.

    12. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      This.

    13. Re: Putting it into Perspective. by KenHansen · · Score: 1

      $11,880 is simply a calculated number used as a benchmark for purposes of qualifying for government assistance. No one believes you can live comfortably on that amount, someone earning that amount of money qualifies for a myriad government programs (section 8 housing assistance, SNAP benefits, free healthcare, etc.).

    14. Re: Putting it into Perspective. by tepples · · Score: 1

      That doesn't include the cost of finding employment, the cost of obtaining the privilege of working in a less expensive country, the cost of finding somewhere to live, etc.

    15. Re: Putting it into Perspective. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Section 8 housing assistance requires a waiting period ranging from months to years. You don't qualify for free healthcare on that amount, in fact you are unlikely to qualify at all without a dependant child and in most cases only the child qualifies. All those benefits actually scale down as you approach the number as well with every dollar you get ahead actually counting against you.

      How do I know? I was the son of a poor single mother. Back then the housing situation wasn't quite as bad, they had "low income housing" and while there was still a waiting list it wasn't as bad as it became when they cut benefits and created the section 8 program. Of course the money counting against you thing was still a big factor. My mother was a hair dresser, her income varied but was never more than $500 every two weeks. Even so, if it was more she had to pay more in rent. Some months we qualified for a medical card and some months not. Every several months we might qualify for help with utilities. However, many of these benefits would then be counted as income for the other benefits and result in those getting cut.

      Since the total combined benefits and income is limited right about that mark, yes, someone expects you can live reasonably (for a single person with no dependents takes about five fold that in most of the country). Comfortably isn't even a factor in this discussion.

    16. Re:Putting it into Perspective. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      I really, really like your thought experiment. Sorry if I sound like an ass to others (things usually hit hard when they're true, just saying), but this is just a definite addition to your experiment.

      How many people that classify themselves as "poor and never going anywhere", and/or below the federal poverty line, are smokers? What's the monthly cost of cigarettes? How about the cost of pack-a-day or more? I'll tell ya what I had when I was a smoker, living in a crappy apartment, with a near-minimum wage job during the height of the recession... I was stupid and "had to smoke" to relieve stress (yes, I was dumb enough to think it relieved stress literally, not chemically/temporarily)... My pack-a-day cost at that time came to be ~= $165/mo.

      Using your thought experiment brings it to $210.86/mo out of $11,800/yr ($226.92/mo). That was the cost of smoking to feel better about being the the shit-hole of a financial mess I was in with a job I hated. Food for thought.

      Good work!

  4. Those Forbidden To Operate Servers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In general I think the simplest answer is that those who are forbidden by their ISPs/governments from operating servers are the ones being actively disadvantaged. The one in control of the server, is in control of the 'free' speech on the internet.

    1. Re:Those Forbidden To Operate Servers by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      In general I think the simplest answer is that those who are forbidden by their ISPs/governments from operating servers are the ones being actively disadvantaged. The one in control of the server, is in control of the 'free' speech on the internet.

      ...not to mention how fast someone else wants to buy that server operation once it starts to get public notice.

  5. Missing more than Internet.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Looking at the groups listed in the article, those folks are missing more than just Internet. Maybe we should focus on their basic human needs first.

    1. Re:Missing more than Internet.. by kenh · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should focus on their basic human needs first.

      You don't understand - if the poor have internet access, then they can just order fresh food, clean water, safe housing, etc. over the internet... /sarcasm

      --
      Ken
  6. Re:Fuckerburg tried... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

    But ~$100m caught fire. Too soon? Oh well.

    And most of Slashdot shit on their attempt to expand Internet access to these people.

    I don't pull out the "privilege" card often but, man they quack like ducks.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  7. Not so fast! by s.petry · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Lets start with the easy one. Remoteness is lumped in to Poverty. Hmm, I wonder why that is? It's the reason we tend to distrust media today in general. This is a open way to inflate the numbers and make people look worse than they are. Look, if you are Poor in the US you have access to much more than if you are at the bottom of middle class. That's not to say you have a higher chance of using them, but tax payers have put in all these programs.

    Next, we go a bit more complex and say "Yes, history shows that knowledge is power and the powerful tend to try and keep knowledge from people." There is a lot done regularly to try and change that, but I don't see too many people taking action. The last was a teenager who killed themselves facing 120 years in jail. That aside, we still are not "that" bad. Books used to be extremely expensive and printed in languages which cost money to learn for the majority of history. Around the time of the Reformation however, that changed. Knowledge has become more and more available if people seek it out, but that last part is a chronic failure of humans. People can not be forced to learn, and learning is rather difficult and time consuming. People want to win the lottery and will scheme for numbers instead of learning simple algebra problems, even though they are guaranteed a payout with education yet slim odds of winning a lottery.

    Are there people who make it intentionally hard for people to learn? I'm pretty sure some of the reports I read about 3rd world countries are true so "yeah". We won't do any more about them than we do about our allies in the Middle East killing women for getting raped or being the wrong Religion or having the wrong sexual preference. The conversation should be framed in very specific terms, but it won't be because that's not the agenda.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Not so fast! by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I left out that part of the argument because people today tend to find anything not commercially viable to be a state of poverty. Value can be measured in many ways, but it's hard to tell that by looking at our large societies.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  8. political motive vs. profit motive by Jodka · · Score: 4, Interesting

    from the ./ summary:

    Each country builds and maintains its own infrastructure for connecting citizens to the wider internet. The decision to expand and maintain the infrastructure in one region and not another is up to those in power. And therein lies the problem: Ethnic and religious minorities who are excluded from their country's political process may also be systematically excluded from the global internet.

    Advocacy of individual economic freedom is often criticized because, among the many possible exercises of that freedom, is radical capitalism: the single-minded pursuit of profits over all other social concerns. Yet, a dedication to monetary profit alone in such conditions as described in the linked study would be preferable to the actual circumstance: a dedication to denying an oppressed group a vital service. Certainly there is much to be made by selling these groups internet service and someone is forgoing profits by not making those sales. More accurately, someone is compelled by government to forgo profits.

    If all you want to do is make big profits, by definition you do not want to limit those profits by declining sales to politically unpopular groups.

    The economist Milton Friedman said, "Human freedom and economic freedom work together." I disagree because that understates the connectedness of those freedoms; the two are one-in-the-same.

       

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature.
    1. Re:political motive vs. profit motive by kenh · · Score: 1

      If all you want to do is make big profits, by definition you do not want to limit those profits by declining sales to politically unpopular groups.

      Rolling out expensive infrastructure to customers that can not afford to pay for the service that funds the infrastructure is NOT the path to "Big Profits" - corporations decide where to roll out infrastructure by the profit potential, not political affiliation.

      --
      Ken
    2. Re:political motive vs. profit motive by kenh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Rural phone/internet service infrastructure is funded by a tax collected on all phone lines.

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:political motive vs. profit motive by kenh · · Score: 1

      Probably not, since he died in 2006.

      --
      Ken
    4. Re:political motive vs. profit motive by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The problem is that infrastructure is expensive to install, and if they pay back is not more or less immediate companies often aren't interested.

      Look at the way ISPs in the US do everything to avoid installing infrastructure where it won't make big profits quickly, even when they agreed to using public money or as part of some franchise agreement.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. non union us IT workers! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    non union us IT workers!

    We need trump to get rid of the H1B's.

    1. Re:non union us IT workers! by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, H1-Bs are not terrible. What we need to get rid of are the people who use loopholes in that system to pay grunt wages to contractors who can then replace US workers.

      If H1-B worked the way it was supposed to, it would be used to fill job roles where there was much more demand than supply of workers. In IT, there are definitely those places where there is low supply and high demand.

      The problem is, as we have seen, is when places like UC get those workers, they do so after firing the US workers. That's basically a complete perversion of the system. UC has proof that there are US workers who could do those jobs (since they were actually employing them), but for some reason, they're being replaced by H1-Bs.

      Trump, if he actually has a plan, which is debatable, should be targeting not H1-Bs, but the contracting firms that allow places like UC to get H1-Bs at second hand and evade letter and the spirit of the H1-B rules.

    2. Re: non union us IT workers! by KenHansen · · Score: 1

      The answer to H1-B problems is painfully simple - double the minimum allowed wage to $120K/yr from $60K and have the amount track the economy. Oh, and of course, actually prosecute companies and organizations that fire employees to create a false need for immigrant visa workers.

    3. Re:non union us IT workers! by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that UC is simply outsourcing. H1Bs are in-house employees brought from another country. Not the same.

  10. voices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    On the internet, everyone's voice is equally irrelevant.

    1. Re:voices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This.
      Most people who whine and cry on the Internet seem to be the kind of people who are always there when something is to be criticized or branded "offensive",
      but when it comes to doing real world work they suddenly disappear. Especially the social media. The fact that legitimacy is given to the proportion of opinions being unloaded in a thread or in a hashtag without even considering the vastly bigger view numbers whose apathy yet lack of response gives its own sign on the relevance or views of the topic, itself shows that even the media are becoming stupid on a basic mathematical level.
      When i see stupid BBC articles stuffing in random Tweets as if they indicate any kind of representation or "numeric validity", it just makes me laugh my ass off at how bad the journalist sector has become.
      Selected individual messages and their content (emotional appeal being the indirect device) are now replacing polls and surveys. This is the level of idiocy they have to stoop down to presently when their ideal and preferred reactions aren't being met by the majority of the comments and views.

  11. [Y]our voice can be amplified online and heard... by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 1

    I expect a Score of 5, recognition of me me me, and tons of posts to this thread glorifying me and my ideas. Which don't need to be explained, I'm on the internet!

    --
    Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
  12. Ironically requires the internet to read :-/ by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

    This is akin to preaching to the choir.

    I would expect an article about "How the lack of internet is having long term consequences" be available in dead tree form.

    1. Re:Ironically requires the internet to read :-/ by eyenot · · Score: 1

      hmm.

      "how the internet's ubiquitous presence is having long term consequences" could also be on dead trees and have even more of an impact in its message -- just not reaching the right crowd. OR IS IT

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  13. Re:Who cares? by umghhh · · Score: 1

    That is a sign you are getting old.

  14. WHITE POWER 14/88 by alternative_right · · Score: 1

    Oh. Not that kind of politically marginalized group.

    1. Re:WHITE POWER 14/88 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Change that to "White Woman Power 14/88".
      In the past few years, it seems white women are trying to take over anything and everything they can.
      Feminism? Lead mainly by white women for some reason, and 9 out of 10 whines and complaints for anything come from white women.
      LGBT? For some reason white women have taken the role of "leading" and "representing" the LGBT.
      Minority groups and ethnic organizations? By some miracle, it's white women being the faces and leading voice acting as their representatives and faces. When a minority is facing a problem, it's not members of those minorities who get a highlight, but white women who jump in the highlight to whine and complain as if they are part of the minorities or their babysitter liaisons.
      And as far as victimization goes? For some reason Twitter and Tumblr indicate that white women are the biggest victims on this planet based on history or systematic theories. Even homosexuals don't get near the level of white women in terms of victim points. Hell, homosexual males are apparently discriminatory against (white) women and that's "problematic"!
      Maybe it's time for white women specifically to start "checking their privilege".

  15. Re:Not marginalized, farmed by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    the two terms looks synonymous to me in this context :P

  16. Re:Well by tepples · · Score: 1

    If "sovereignty of nations" were absolute, it would allow nations to abridge basic human rights, such as the right to get an education and participate in culture. So are you for absolute "sovereignty of nations" or for exceptions to that sovereignty when necessary to uphold human rights?

  17. Revolution now by mongothesecond · · Score: 1

    Throw off your shackles of non-connectivity. The revolution will not be televised, but you will be able to complain endlessly on social media.

  18. Re:I am not a network engineer. Can someone explai by eyenot · · Score: 1

    i think it's a matter of information gaps, not necessarily that the information isn't there but that it's not in a handy ready to transmit form and it hasn't all been collated into one spot outside of some NSA operation.

    basically ISPs serve their customers. their work is downstream. all of their customer data is relevant downstream. well, unless they're selling names and addresses to advertisers.

    so sure the ISPs know where all their customers are, but the other ISPs don't. and there's no central repository of this private business information for others to glean from. unless we're talking about several ISPs that are all operated by the same umbrella corporation for the sake of avoiding public accusations of market monopoly.

    now let's consider how you're going to find all the ISPs of some other country. sure, in the united states all ISPs register with the FCC. there's not necessarily an analog in every other country, especially when we start getting down to countries that should be undeveloped but ran ahead and screwed their shit up by developing some things too fast and other things too slowly. countries where basically you can see something like a beautiful 100,000 luxury bus dropping off the side of a mountain because there's nothing but some mud clinging to the side of a mountain and somebody felt that was a road. or you see something like a team of guys trying to get a backhoe off a truck by lowering it down on its own arm because they can't afford a mother. fucking. ramp. it's literally one of history's oldest tools and here they have a hydraulic shovel and a diesel engine truck and they don't have a fucking ramp. so somewhere out there is an ISP that doesn't even have to have a license to pay a guy with one towel around his dick and another around his head to go out also without a license and climb a pole using a rope and almost get electrocuted while hanging cat-5 from a wooden pole using carpentry staples. unless the third world we're talking about is a united state trailer park in which case the registry they're using is probably the sex offender registry.

    --
    "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  19. Free Speech Matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Neither of you understand. If the poor have internet access, and internet access does translate into free speech, then the poor get a voice. In my analysis, that is step number one for them and all of us best addressing the situation.

    1. Re:Free Speech Matters by kenh · · Score: 1

      If the poor have internet access, and internet access does translate into free speech, then the poor get a voice.

      Right. "free speech" trumps clean water and air, healthy food, and a place to live.

      Seriously? Have you ever been homeless or hungry? Did you find your ability to keep up on facebook more important than either of those?

      --
      Ken
    2. Re:Free Speech Matters by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      If the poor have internet access, and internet access does translate into free speech, then the poor get a voice.

      Right. "free speech" trumps clean water and air, healthy food, and a place to live.

      Seriously? Have you ever been homeless or hungry? Did you find your ability to keep up on facebook more important than either of those?

      This is the generation gap (or whatever it should be labeled) I have a raised-eyebrow "condition" with as I age. The Internet was an expensive and near-useless toy when it started out. People didn't use it. They used the phone, they had friends as neighbors, kept in contact with family, etc.

      Today I see a family of four (two parents, two kids) standing in line in a restaurant for carry-out. Each of the parents whips out their phone occasionally to look at something on FB/Twitter. It's almost like a knee-jerk reaction to something in their head - it's habit. Both of the kids (one barely walking, the other old enough to talk but not understand adult things like empathy, kindness, etc, have a smartphone in their hands. They are both incapable of lifting their heads from it. Even when grabbed lightly, directly asked a question, and the arms of the older kid pushed down a bit to break eyes from the smartphone to ask what he wanted to eat, he was agitated and wanted to pull his hands back up. He couldn't concentrate on food and answering the question. The line was held up for over a minute with this one question.

      I knew what to do. I looked peripherally and directly around and behind me. The younger people were staring into their smartphones, my generation was tapping feet and reaching for smartphones, older folks were shaking heads, looking at each other, making hand gestures that indicated their conversation was about "How is it that people are allowed to do this these days?"

      I'm not saying those were their exact words, but body language isn't hard to read. The younger generation thinks that keeping up on FB is more important than much else. Said generation is raising kids that are tied to a device that keeps them quiet and mesmerized. Monkey see, monkey do. They will grow up attached to a device that they can't function without.

      I'm guilty myself. I use my smartphone to look up information on wikipedia, dictionary occasionally, obviously /. ... The biggest is weather. I'm a storm spotter (which doesn't mean anything to someone without empathy or hasn't had their ass indirectly saved by one), and I'm trying to figure out why my area of the country has a particularly unpredictable weather pattern. I believe it's a river valley at the angle it's at along with other outflow from storms on flatter land, but I digress. I use it to look at what's on radar when it's a severe storm-likely day or if something is actively happening. This is going somewhere... keep reading...

      I went to visit my grandmother who lives in E. BF Tennessee, in a hilly region where there is only one duplex cell provider and it isn't mine. I have no service while down there. It's relaxing because (hehehe) I can't be called for emergency work service (SERVER IS DOWN OMG OMG) - someone else has to deal with it. Doesn't matter because I'm on vacation in case anyone is questioning the logic behind that. Anyhow, when Grandma and I are talking about something, I am often not able to recall a specific example of something that we're talking about, so I reach to my pocket for my good ol' smartphone and see.... the time. I shake my head at myself for forgetting there isn't service (and she only has flaky dial-up, FWIW, and no wireless, obviously). I put the phone back in the pocket and conversation continues. Stories of storms where she grew up are talked about and I reach for the sweet smartphone to pull up pictures of that event and...bah. Shake my head at myself and continue. It takes about 10+ times before I get into the habit of not reaching to that device

  20. DUH by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Most of these places, are 3rd world countries, or have oppressive dictatorships, that don't want their citizens educated or informed on what is going on, via an outside independent source. As for the countries in Africa, when you live in mud & straw huts, drink from a ditch beside your hut, I don't think internet access is #1 on their priority list.

  21. Occam's Razor by alternative_right · · Score: 1

    Seen any on TV, in power, or getting press lately?

    They're pretty much the fringe.

  22. Who Else Has Time? by alternative_right · · Score: 1

    White women, sitting along, dissatisfied with their cubicle jobs...

    What else could they do but agitate for power through political means?

    I doubt that WHITE POWER means WHITE SUPREMACY, but even so, FEMINISM clearly means FEMALES FIRST, even if not FEMALE SUPREMACY.

  23. Education through Internet by tepples · · Score: 2

    Education is a basic human need, and Internet is (among other things) a tool for fulfilling that need.

  24. Re: Not marginalized, farmed by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    All people are treated that way. FTFY.

  25. Chmod by QuadEddie · · Score: 1

    In the context of poor people and poor countries: Chmod 444 TheInternet Get them online, but have them lurk for a few years.

  26. By design? by yusing · · Score: 1

    just belonging to a politically marginalized group can translate to poorer access.

    That's not terribly suspicious. First and foremost, the internet exists to serve the privileged. From those who had/have the time to make it, to those who use its existence to better their own situation in life. Who's worrying about - let's say - it's impact on the education of the young? Clearly not very many people, since ordered, graduated, high-quality writng and tools to access it with are certainly not a substantial part of what's here (apart from, for example, -some- college professors to put -some- of their materials onlilne). It's largely dedicated to insubstantial entertainment for the masses (like the old mass media), as well as specialist forums for the already-educated.

    There once existed an FM pioneer who complained "look what you've done to my child!" That early complaint has developed into a perennial pattern seen all across implementations of technology. While it's new and fun, people like Alan Kay and Seymour Papert have big, substantial dreams for it. And then the promise is dissipated, diluted to serve the same old mundanities. We had a chance to keep that from happening, but once again we're stumbling into the same old mental pitfalls that made the 20th century possible.

    --

    "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

  27. Last gen DSLR camera users by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Who have to remove a camera memory card, get to a "computer" and upload their images.
    Or use some wifi or bluetooth network to try and send the images to a "computer" to then upload.
    Buy into some brand and then locked into some branded software that tries to network with the camera and some parts of social media.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. Re:I am not a network engineer. Can someone explai by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    re "i think it's a matter of information gaps, not necessarily that the information isn't there but that it's not in a handy ready to transmit form and it hasn't all been collated into one spot outside of some NSA operation."
    State and federal police globally are thinking of the same NSA level tasking per ip, or interesting person they find.
    Police spy on web, phone usage with no warrants (Feb 18 2012)
    http://www.smh.com.au/technolo...
    "Access is authorised by senior police officers or officials rather than by judicial warrant."
    Mapping the internet is easy if every provider has to help via logs or a per provider real time server for police access able to reverse any ip in use to an account national.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"