Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
In a message dated 4/8/02 7:53:32 PM, Don Cameron [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I do not see quantity of time spent on a computer as necessarily having any particular significance to a students future prospects, (unless it is truly miniscule, or the student fully intends to complete tertiary studies and enter the IT industry), rather I view the quality of tuition and tasks performed by the student as elements offering the highest degree of pay-back. I have gone to schools in other countries where the professor and his notes are the resident knowledge, which did or did not reflect the knowledge in the field. You also are talking about a student generically. Students in a class are usually very diverse. There are students who may already know the subject well, who have read and learned a lot and who would be further interested in the subject based on their ability to aquire resources, contacts, materials, and other types of learning. We could use space science, medicine, earthscience, and or literature as a test case. Though there are a lot of titled individuals who are quite skilled in teaching and learning , there is no one teacher who is the respository of all knowledge. The Internet does not contain all knowledge either, but to an interested student at any level with requisite skills, there is a treasure chest of experts, websites, references, magazines and ideational scaffolding for learning. Bonnie Bracey ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] RFI: Dev. Countries and Open Source Software
The OS becomes irrelevent for web-based computing. Microsoft's .net is a web-based OS, providing an array of portals, each offering tailored content and applications to a unique audience. I have referenced in my book descriptions of some of the various webs that will reside on the Internet, with their differences due either to technical design (different designs maximize use of different applications) or the unique form of marketplace (supplier and/or consumer) being served. One size doesn't, as yet, fit all. It never will. In all probability, monolithic sole-provider networks instituted at government fiat, a disruptive and unhealthy gothic reversion to discredited monopolistic communications policy, are sustainable in only a handful of countries. In fact, due the unique technical requirements inherent to different ICT deployments and use (differing applications or user groups), there's no discernible reason for limiting the number of networks. Why carry low-cost basic applications on technical infrastructures more complicated and having a higher underlying cost? Technology has achieved inter-operability, with costs falling rapidly. Government is participating with a small handful of incumbents to (1) restrict the introduction of latest technology by independent ICT's, (2) minimize and limit the number of telecoms, (3) restrict use of VoIP and web computing applications, (4) limit the provisioning of spectrum, (5) deny market entry by imposing fantastic licensing fees and regulation, (6) reconstitute an oligopoly under powerful incumbent providers of extant (legacy) technologies, and (7) impose hidden control over communications through hierarchic deployment (ie. sophisticated, futuristic, commercial applications receive priority). Technology isn't failing us. We are failing to use ICT to its fullest extent. Government, under the corrupting and irrealizable promises of incumbents, chooses to follow its proven methods for building beneficial industries, but has failed to recognize that communications, unrestrained by technical (or physical, ie. customs tolls) difficulty, is no longer an industry. Communications evolves to omnipresence, and in molding to our needs, as opposed to the reverse, becomes a utility to all endeavor. Society is responsible for determining which basic IP applications must be made universal (ie. low-cost). It is this decision, and these basic applications, that decide the minimum degree of enfranchisement in competitive modernity. It is not a decision based on limited technology, or on technology at all. I have more than once rightfully accused civil society of failing to protect our interests. Our digital divide organizations continue to belabor positions better relevent to advanced penetration. Funding is determined by government and the independent agencies beholden to its patronage, in cooperation with ICT incumbents who constrain its use to neglible result, to retard and delay low-cost competition from unrestrained ICT deployment... an increasingly tenuous probability though strictly enforced through an illogical regulation that defies both technology and the operation of free markets. The software, computer and telecom incumbents didn't invent our new IP technologies... they are restricting the deployment of these for commercial benefit. And, they are protected by government and the civil societal organizations they influence (ie. fund). The question of what constitutes the digital divide may be better expressed as who constitutes the digital divide. This is a stark realization of which to avoid admission, in similarity with the failure to decide necessary IP applications, many of my colleagues undertake fantastic machinations and incredulous arguments. For which social purpose do our enlightened so often attach confusing definitions and misleading goals, and bombastic rhetoric, to the digital divide? Who benefits? Certain basic IP communications applications must be made universally accessible. Spectrum must be reserved by government for non-profit organizations. The most basic level of communications must not be under the control, or even influence, of government or their agents, neither entities public nor private. Physical presence must be eliminated as a requisite for basic communications. Alan Levy Mexico, D.F. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
[GKD] UN ICT Task Force--Europe Central Asia Reg. Network
UN ICT Task Force Europe and Central Asia Regional Network Call for Participation In March 2001, the United Nations Economic and Social Council requested the Secretary-General to establish an Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Task Force. This initiative is intended to lend a truly global dimension to the multitude of efforts to bridge the global digital divide, foster digital opportunity and thus firmly put ICT at the service of development for all. The objective of the Task Force is to provide overall leadership to the United Nations role in helping to formulate strategies for the development of information and communication technologies and putting those technologies at the service of development and, on the basis of consultations with all stakeholders and Member States, forging a strategic partnership between the United Nations system, private industry and financing trusts and foundations, donors, programme countries and other relevant stakeholders in accordance with relevant United Nations resolutions. The Task Force had its first inaugural meeting on 19-20 November 2001 and its second meeting on 3-4 February 2002. At its first meeting, the Task Force adopted its Plan of Action. It also established six Working Groups. These thematic Working Groups are open for participation by non-members of the Task Force. A decision was also made to establish regional nodes of the Task Force, initially in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean and for the group of Arab States. The UN ICT Task Force requested the Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) secretariat to host a meeting to launch the European Regional Network on 29th April 2002 and to help to ensure that the UN ICT for Development process makes a dynamic contribution to the regional preparations for the World Summit on the Information Society (2003), reducing duplication and promoting synergies for the benefit of the Member States and other stakeholders throughout the region. The meeting in Geneva has two objectives: first, to set up the regional network to support the UN ICT for Development process; second, to help define the focus for the European regional preparatory conference on the WSIS, scheduled for November 2002 in Bucharest. In order to develop a dynamic network, we plan to invite a wide range of stakeholders: international organisations, regional institutions, civil society, the academic and research community, and business. We would welcome your suggestions as to civil society participants from your country that we should invite. Please pass the invitation, attached agenda, and registration form on to all those whom you think would contribute to the meeting. We would appreciate if you could kindly circulate this information to your contacts as widely as possible. Dear colleagues, I am the coordinator of the Working Group, which was established recently on the initiative of Andrey Korotkov, Member of the UN ICT Task Force and National Coordinator of the Russian e-Development Partnership (PRIOR), to organize the UN ICT Task Force Europe and Central Asia Regional Network Launch Meeting. For convenience we set up a discussion group un-ict-tf-eucas on Yahoo (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/un-ict-tf-eucas/) where you can find additional materials on the Geneva meeting. To subscribe to the group you need to come to the above address of the group and follow the instructions. Looking forward for our fruitful cooperation and with best regards, Yuri ___ Dr. Yuri Hohlov Chairman of the Expert Committee Russian e-Development Partnership P.O. Box 716, 101000 Moscow Russia Tel./Fax: +7 (095) 925-1727 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.russia-gateway.ru ___ Chairman of the Board Institute of the Information Society - Russia P.O. Box 189, 103009 Moscow Russia Tel./Fax: +7 (095) 925-1727 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.iis.ru ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
