On another list with concerns about the digital divide, and the talks
about the $100 computer, Sam Lanfranco [EMAIL PROTECTED] makes some
very, very interesting observations, as follows:
Sam Lanfranco writes
:
GKD has had an interesting and instructive round of discussion about the
$100 computer. It explored the prospects for, current uses of, and
obstacles facing the spread of inexpensive computers in the service of
development in the poor regions of the world.
If there is one positive lesson to take from the discussion, it is that
low cost computers (circa $100) are possible and can be used to
community benefit, if all the other dimensions
(technical/social/economic) of a well planned community project are also
in place. Such computers may be specially built or may be refurbished
older machines.
If there is one negative lesson to be learned it is about how hard it is
for a good ICT idea being carried out in one corner of the globe to
effectively enter knowledge networks and be used elsewhere on the globe.
This negative lesson is not the result of a lack of ICT knowledge
mobility per se but more the result of organizational obstacles
resulting from either opportunism (claiming ICT innovation when ICT
knowledge transfer is more appropriate) or a culture of organizational
silos (where ICT public relations frequently outpace ICT organizational
learning).
Both of these organizational maladies are treatable, partially by
broadening the stakeholder participation in project development and
execution, and partially by a more critical stance on the part of those
funding the organizations seeking funding for silo mentality ICT
projects.
The discussion has positioned the promise of the $100 computer against
experience of the wireless cell phone and suggested that building out
from the cell phone, rather than building down the higher end computer,
is one likely path for technology based progress across the digital
divide.
This is both clearly true and clearly happening. There is however
another dark horse (unseen) technology unfolding that may hold a
promise for significant leaps in technology use across the digital
divide, a technology frontier that will unfold in one setting but can be
easily migrated to other settings.
That technology goes by the name of in-vehicle telematics. In-vehicle
telematics consists of the network of processors, monitors and control
devices within the modern automobile, and the user interface that allows
the driver (or passengers) to make use of ICT within the vehicle
(especially the vehicle in motion).
The typical new vehicle has 50 or more onboard processors, many designed
to perform specific tasks. In-vehicle telematics operate on at least
three frontiers. One is the internal automatic command and control of
the vehicle (fuel, braking, skid control, etc.) A second consists of
monitoring vital transport signs to feed information to the driver, or
an external monitoring centre. The third is to provide the driver, and
passengers, with access to information and controls for decision making.
There is no need to detail all these options here except to note that a
significant, necessary, and important component to in-vehicle telematics
is the need for voice-to-voice interaction between the driver and
onboard systems. This is necessary for safe driving since using a
keyboard, or giving attention to a screen, while driving, is not a good
idea.
What does all this have to do with ICT for development? The answers are
fairly simple, short and direct. First of all, this complex system
operates on an electrical system based on one 12 volt battery and a
generator. Second, it operates across a range of harsh climates (heat,
cold, moisture, vibration, etc.). The user interface includes a range of
technologies including cellular networks, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB ports,
etc.
However, third and most important, the user interface also necessarily
includes the voice-command/voice-response element essential for safe
vehicle operation. The voice-to-voice interface represents a significant
opportunity for multi-lingual user interfaces since voice recognition
and generation applications rest, at their base, on phonemes, the
smallest contructive unit in the sound system of a language. This has
the potential to bypass the challenge of keyboard and screen character
generation and recognition, and puts the technology in the reach of a
user who can neither read nor write.
As suggested, this is a dark horse candidate for shrinking the digital
divide. It should not go unnoticed that the Italian Fiat Auto company
and Microsoft have just teamed up for a strategic partnership with
regard to in-vehicle telematics, one where voice-to-voice communications
will be central.
The interesting question here is whether external research and
development groups will work to adapt these technologies to the
challenges of the digital divide, or if 5 to 10 years down the road
enterprising groups in developing countries will re-tool
