Where is the refutation?

Just because the English language wants us to frame things in a certain way 
doesn't mean that's the reality.

-Sunil


On Oct 17, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Tapan Parikh wrote:

> Clay Shirky rebuts Toyama much better then I ever could:
> http://crookedtimber.org/2011/10/10/guestpost-communications-tools-agency-and-anxiety/
> 
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Tapan Parikh <tapan at cs.washington.edu> 
> wrote:
> Ive never understood Kentaros point here, or at least why its delivered with 
> such pessimism.
> 
> Its strictly a glass half-full, half-empty kind of argument.  Of course 
> technology does not achieve its effect in isolation.  Of course you need all 
> the rest of the things Kentaro mentions.  But an "amplifier of your intent" 
> still sounds pretty awesome to me.  This is what Steve Jobs was trying to do 
> for us, and what we are trying (successfully or unsuccessfully) to achieve 
> for the poor and marginalized through ICT4D.  Im not saying that computers 
> are the best or most appropriate technology, but the potential is there, and 
> that is why we are working to achieve it, and why it is still research.
> 
> I find Joyojeet's critique much more interesting.  Are computers truly 
> amplifiers, or are they strictly aspirational?  Said another way, is high 
> technology perceived as an end in and of itself, or do we understand its true 
> machinations*, and use them for some other higher purpose - the highest being 
> to learn, and through the process become better people, or a better society. 
> I am sure everyone who has worked in ICTD has directly observed "gadget lust" 
> in our partners, users, and without doubt, in ourselves.  
> 
> Summarizing my point, the important question is "are u the one riding the 
> horse, or is the horse riding you?".  The jury is still out on this for 
> ICT4D, as it is for the rest of the World, IMHO.
>   
> * For the philosophy and German buffs, see Heidegger's "The Question 
> Concerning Technology".
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Yaw Anokwa <yanokwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> rahul,
> 
> i would encourage you to check out
> http://www.kentarotoyama.org/research. i think his work on
> technology as an amplifier and the ten myths of ict4d will be quite
> insightful.
> 
> yaw
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 18:16, Rahul Banerjee <banerjee at cs.washington.edu> 
> wrote:
> > Yes, I agree that this is simply another hardware platform on which
> > people can build stuff. It is a solution enabler, not a solution in
> > itself. However, this price point means that one can deploy solutions
> > for cheaper than with existing hardware.
> >
> > I think we all agree that *solutions* built on top of hardware
> > platforms change people's lives -- cheap hardware simply opens up such
> > possibilities to interested parties who want to build solutions, but
> > don't have enough money for expensive hardware.
> >
> > I would like to emphasize this point -- the best ideas can come from
> > anywhere. Once you let such a cheap device loose into the wild (so to
> > speak), I'm certain that several talented people will come up with
> > good ideas and implement them. What remains to be seen is how many of
> > those are useful and improve people's lives significantly.
> >
> > --
> > Rahul
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Clint Tseng <cxlt at cs.washington.edu> 
> > wrote:
> >> Yes, but your argument is centered around how the technology is better. I
> >> don't think I have to point out who we're echoing when we say that
> >> technology alone is not enough. We could make the Galaxy S2 or the iPhone 4
> >> cost $10 and it simply wouldn't make the kind of difference you'd hope for
> >> (eg, much at all).
> >> The App Store is not available because you have to pay Google licensing 
> >> fees
> >> to put it on your device, which would have driven the cost up.
> >> Touchscreens are nice, but I don't think any of this will truly matter for
> >> the populations we're talking about until we see voice technology like Siri
> >> develop to the point where you don't need to care that you're talking to
> >> technology. At that point, perhaps it's worth revisiting the distribution 
> >> of
> >> generic technology to remote regions and untrained users without caring
> >> about what their actual needs are. For now, it's still much better to
> >> actually do the footwork to figure out what people need and give them that
> >> than to try to hand out or sell general purpose computing devices and hope
> >> to make a difference.
> >> $0.02.
> >> -Clint
> >>
> >> On Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Rahul Banerjee wrote:
> >>
> >> Against a cell phone, the tablet's screen is a compelling argument.
> >>
> >> However, I don't know if really poor people (who are mostly
> >> illiterate) would go for a tablet over a *television* -- I've observed
> >> that even people living in illegally constructed shacks next to train
> >> tracks always have a DTH antenna dish sticking out from the roof. My
> >> belief is that:
> >> 1. TV's are dead simple to operate -- turn them on and they work. If
> >> you can't navigate your magical tablet's touchscreen, you have a
> >> magical paperweight.
> >> 2. There's decent infrastructure in place (in India) to get a
> >> direct-to-home subscription. I've been to some pretty remote places in
> >> India (places that are accessible only using off-road vehicles and are
> >> completely cut-off for three months during winter) and nearly all
> >> these houses had dish antennas. AFAIK, 3G-based data plans aren't that
> >> ubiquitous yet (you could only get them in certain cities in India
> >> last time I checked -- about 2 months ago).
> >>
> >> The battery question is an interesting one -- I read a review which
> >> stated that the battery life is two hours. I've observed in urban
> >> slums that (illegally) hooking up wires to overhead electricity supply
> >> cables (a dangerous practice, to be sure) is common. I'm not claiming
> >> that this is the norm everywhere, but financial pressure often
> >> eliminates batteries anyway :)
> >>
> >> I'm going to keep on harping on the "poor but intelligent/talented
> >> student" angle. These are the people who'll benefit the most from such
> >> a device. Imagine being able to read textbooks on this! Btw, I also
> >> discovered in the review that the App Store / Marketplace is disabled,
> >> which is *not cool*. Maybe they don't expect the target users to have
> >> connectivity, but this severely limits the platform. There are a ton
> >> of free apps out there which the users cannot get, and now custom
> >> delivery platforms will have to be built for every project (I'm
> >> thinking of textbooks, telemedicine, the fieldwork apps like the
> >> Verbal Autopsy stuff, etc)
> >>
> >> I've rambled enough here. My summary would be that this is a giant
> >> step forward, but the poorest of the poor (think indigent poverty)
> >> won't magically lift themselves out of poverty using this one device.
> >> However, it does generate lots of exciting possibilities for
> >> "slightly-better-off" segments and it can be an enabling device for
> >> several projects on a shoestring budget.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rahul
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Fritz Meissner <fritz.meissner at 
> >> gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Just brainstorming a hypothetically compelling reason: consumption of
> >> locally-made movies, which I'm given to understand currently happens
> >> wholesale on cellphones in India. Would the move to tablet form, i.e. 
> >> bigger
> >> screen and (one would hope) better sound, make for a massively improved
> >> experience?
> >> The Aakash could be a better investment than a TV / DVD player, given the
> >> greater capacity and reusability of USB or SD cards compared to DVDs. Of
> >> course, the TV has a bigger screen, but it doesn't run on batteries. How
> >> much would a TV cost?
> >>
> >> Fritz
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Jerome White <jerome at cs.caltech.edu> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> However, there is a "rural/poor" segment that could afford this: those
> >> making between 5 and 10 thousand Rupees a month. In fact it's what some
> >> spend on a mobile phone. However, with the mobile, there is very compelling
> >> reason to make such an investment. A similarly compelling reason, from 
> >> their
> >> perspective, to own this device isn't clear to me.
> >>
> >> But, at least we've got another device to help us generate publications :)
> >>
> >> jerome
> >>
> >> On 06-Oct-2011, at 4:11 PM, Fritz Meissner wrote:
> >>
> >> How much is $35 to the poorest of the poor? I recall an economics study
> >> that paid Indian workers the equivalent of a monthly salary, I think that
> >> was 50USD... 35USD is beyond cheap in the West but perhaps still not
> >> affordable in that context.
> >>
> >> OTOH if the tablet is locally made, perhaps just the work that the
> >> manufacturer provides will be beneficial.
> >>
> >> Fritz
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Joyojeet Pal <joyojeet at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I agree with Yaw on this -- sure, it is great that this technology is so
> >> cheap, and one can argue that similar such efforts have brought up new
> >> technology innovations (Netbook etc) and various other benefits, what is
> >> deeply problematic is the idea that this will solve the issues of
> >> development in India, and Indian minister Kapil Sibal's announcing the
> >> project as being some kind of a dig out of exclusion
> >> (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/india-announces-35-tablet-computer-to-help-lift-villagers-out-of-poverty/2011/10/05/gIQAPT8PNL_story.html)
> >>
> >> If you look at UNDP's latest HDI report on India, you may find that
> >> someone should find this claim at least quixotic, given that the country
> >> ranks 119th in the world for what ranks are worth. India as a state spends
> >> among the lowest on education (3.6%) and healthcare (1.1%) and has an 
> >> income
> >> inequality problem that is by all measure growing yearly, gender inequity 
> >> is
> >> 0.748 (on a scale of the 'best' at 0.212 and 'worst' at 0.814). the average
> >> Indian spends 4.4 years in formal schooling.. the list goes on and on.
> >>
> >> i'm not saying this is not a significant achievement, my concern is
> >> tying this to development in such a way, in fact specifically in the
> >> perception that this could be the state's part in providing development in
> >> india. i think it hurts the cause of folks working in this space at the 
> >> very
> >> least.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Yaw Anokwa <yanokwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> the hype around this tablet is terrible.
> >>
> >> i think it's great to have cheaper technology, but android tablets,
> >> even cheap $35 android tablets, will not lift villagers out of
> >> poverty. i wish it were that easy...
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 15:49, Rahul Banerjee
> >> <banerjee at cs.washington.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry for the spam, but I couldn't resist sharing such wonderful news:
> >>
> >> http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/India-announces-35-tablet-computer-for-rural-poor-2203509.php
> >>
> >> (Actually, the government is subsidising its price (which would be
> >> closer to $50), but it's still pretty amazing that something like this
> >> exists at all)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rahul
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> change mailing list
> >> change at change.washington.edu
> >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > change mailing list
> > change at change.washington.edu
> > http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> change mailing list
> change at change.washington.edu
> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> change mailing list
> change at change.washington.edu
> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/private/change/attachments/20111017/1fc3e4e1/attachment.html>

Reply via email to