Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Bringing Connectivity to Under-Served Communities

[S Woodside]

On Monday, December 1, 2003, Robert Miller wrote:

> Simon Woodside wrote:
>
>> WorldSpace is a broadcast system. With a WorldSpace system you are 
>> only capable of receiving data, not sending it.
>
> I wish to disagree in that we are currently using WorldSpace very
> effectively as a global multicast solution to refresh all of the Axxess
> servers that Advanced Interactive currently has installed across Africa.
> With a dialup line as a "back channel" the server maintains contact with
> the global Network Operations Center that remotely manages this entire
> network.

..[snip statements I agree with]...

> let us not discount this technology where a differentiated "last mile"
> solution can manage its shortcomings and turn 1-way downlink with a
> server managed dialup back channel into a viable way of a sustainable
> affordable connected community.

Robert, your post has raised more questions than it answered. Thus far,
WorldSpace has been billed as a beachhead information system that can be
deployed in areas that have no communications infrastructure. I think
I'm convinced at this point that's a valid development, though not one I
would ever pursue.

It's been assumed so far that once an internet connection is available,
the internet is superior. And yes -- since on the internet, my rural
users can talk back, hold conversations, email their relatives, use VoIP
-- all impossible with WorldSpace.

Now you have described a situation which adds a dialup to the regular
WorldSpace receiver unit. But why would anyone bother with WorldSpace at
all if they have dialup internet access?

We run the risk of applying a technology (WorldSpace) "just because we
can" in that situation.

simon

--
99% Devil, 1% Angel
homepage http://www.simonwoodside.com
for the developing world http://www.openict.net
member of http://www.mozilla.org/projects/camino




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Bringing Connectivity to Under-Served Communities

[S Woodside]

My main concern about WorldSpace is that it is billed as a
"communication" system. Most electronic communication systems are
two-way, they allow conversations. But WorldSpace is one-way. It is, in
fact, a broadcasting system, not a communications system. Just as you
would call TV a broadcast system. WorldSpace users are passive
observers.

I think it is a good broadcast system. It supports data broadcasting,
which is new and has many uses. But if we are talking about ICT,
information and communications technologies, this is an IT, not a CT.
While communications systems involve connections and interaction,
broadcasting involves transmitters and receivers.

Although WorldSpace's own websites are very careful to speak only of
transmission and reception, others make mistakes.

" The WorldSpace satellite network is an innovative communication
technology that enables people to access information even in the
remotest villages where there are no telephone lines or electricity."
  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1608394.stm

"The unique, patented technology allows inexpensive connectivity to the
computer directly from the satellite."
   


The internet is very poor at broadcasting. But it's excellent as a
communication medium. As another person recently wrote:

"Because the WorldSpace product is a satellite receiver, there's no
back-channel for data upload. As a result, you can't send email, request
additional cached webpages or give feedback on whether a particular
piece of content is useful."
 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/xdev/22.html

So, in conclusion. WorldSpace is an innovative and obviously useful
information dissemination tool. But, on the other hand, a basic, slow
email system (even with intermediaries) is better at communication.

simon


On Friday, November 28, 2003, David J.A. Sawe wrote:

> Arguably, the initial step towards joining the information society is to
> receive information, and not to transmit blindly. In the same way, a
> newborn's first breath is always to inhale and not to exhale. Especially
> in terms of educating, informing and entertaining, there is much that
> can be achieved through being able to merely receive broadcasts. If this
> were not the case, then the traditional forms of media dissemination
> (ie. radio/TV/print) could never have become as pervasive as they are
> now in our more privileged urban areas.
>
> So WorldSpace satellite radio "receivers" bring about inclusivity by
> merely offering a new option for reliably receiving high quality audio
> and data content in locations hitherto excluded from any of the
> traditional media forms. Of course, as with traditional broadcast
> media, other options would need to be looked into on a case-by-case
> basis to contribute anything in return; but at the outset, this
> requirement is not a sine qua non.


--
99% Devil, 1% Angel
anti-spam: do NOT post this address publicly
homepage http://www.simonwoodside.com
for the developing world http://www.openict.net
member of http://www.mozilla.org/projects/camino




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Bringing Connectivity to Under-Served Communities

[S Woodside]

WorldSpace is a broadcast system. With a WorldSpace system you are only
capable of receiving data, not sending it. While I think WorldSpace is a
great and wonderful thing, it's very dangerous if people thinking it's a
substitute for the "real thing" which is an internet connection that
allows two-way communication, email, web access, VoIP, web email,
content creation, content sharing ... none of those are possible with
WorldSpace.

So, if you want to be merely an information consumer ... WorldSpace is
fine. If you want to join the information society, you need something
more.

simon


On Wednesday, November 19, 2003, Robert Miller wrote:

> The WorldSpace connection together with this CampusAxxess "last mile"
> solution for any school, campus, or village truly narrows the digital
> divide in an affordable and sustainable way. For more info, contact Dr.
> S. Rangarajan, Sr. Vice President of WorldSpace at
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or me.

--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
  99% Devil, 1% Angel


--
   anti-spam: do not post this address publicly
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel



This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Improving Access Via Mobile Telephony

[S Woodside]

The regulatory environment is very poor for Wi-Fi in developing
countries. Please refer to the growing list of countries and their
regulations here:

http://openict.net/projects/openspectrum/

(choose ByCountry)

The reality "on the ground" is that MOST developing countries do NOT
have the proper regulations to make Wi-Fi possible. They need to issue
Open Spectrum licenses (for free use of the correct spectrum) but have
not done so yet. This situation is taken advantage of by the incumbent
telephone companies who in many cases use the lack of proper regulation
to shut down inexpensive, open, and often free Wi-Fi systems ... because
they see them as competition.

For those of you who may have the ability to influence policy ... more
open spectrum licenses are needed in developing countries ...

simon


On Friday, November 21, 2003, Al Hammond wrote:

> Whether WiFi-like or cellular solutions are most feasible
> may depend as much on the regulatory environment (what's legal) and on
> the openness to innovation in cellular providers.

--
   anti-spam: do not post this address publicly
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] What's on the Horizon?

[S Woodside]

Time for peering into the crystal ball, I guess. First, three years is
about the outer limit IMO for any kind of computer technology
predictions. I tend to look at trends that are coming in the next year
or two and that's quite challenging enough...

> This week we ask GKD members to consider the distant future in ICT terms
> -- the next 3 years. "Connectivity for All." It has a nice ring, but
> success thus far has been limited. Funding is a central issue.

I would say that to the contrary, funding is not a central issue. It is
easily possible to pour money into hare-brained schemes that will never
yield positive results. Whereas, it is far more difficult to determine
what scheme will succeed. Funding is important, but I believe it should
come out of a natural process that begins first with coming up with a
correct scheme.

For example, I have recently read that the East African nations are
devoting hundreds of millions of $ to build an undersea cable. I cannot
say enough that this is an excellent move. However, if I could question
these initiators I would ask - what is your sharing plan? Currently the
West African cable (SAT-3) is very slow to bring benefits because it is
monopolized. The bandwidth is NOT being used. There is in fact either
none or very little competition available, but rather one single
supplier in each country of the bandwidth "tap" that comes out of this
"fat pipe". The single supplier is a monopoly that knows only one rule -
charge high prices. Clearly not the best for the people. What will the
East African cable organization do differently? Perhaps I'm being
pessimistic, but I suspect it has never occurred to them as a problem
worth giving thought to.

So I have an intrinsic distrust of huge funding because I think it's
more difficult to think creatively in a very expensive project.

> Forgo experimentation

Disagree. Technology is unpredictable. Experimentation, lots of
different trials at small scale, is key. Open reporting on successes and
FAILURES is key. Then harvest the results and learn, learn, learn.

> 1. What new "high impact" technologies are on the 3-year horizon? Who
> (exactly) needs to do what (concretely) to make those technologies
> widely available?

Wi-Fi is a big one. Whoever is able to influence government policy needs
to push developing governments to create an Open Spectrum plan to allow
the Wi-Fi growth to happen.

Java-enabled cell phones is another area that I think will explode. J2ME
enabled java phones will be "the new PC" especially in developing areas
where the following qualities are so valuable: a) portable b) rugged c)
cheap d) low-power

Wireless cellular in general but I don't think anyone here needs to do
anything to make that happen - it's already rolling like a steamroller.

In the developing world, I believe that technologies that can be used by
people who are illiterate - whether is a Simputer type technology, or
internet voice mail :-) will be very popular and important to achieving
development goals.

Broadband is very important. I think it has been given short shrift in
these discussions. The #1 rule of bandwidth is you NEVER have enough
bandwidth. Businesses can be built purely on the basis of HAVING
broadband. We are talking about voice applications over the internet -
this requires broadband. E-learning over the internet - need broadband
for that. Downloading the latest version of Linux - broadband. We may
realize that we sometimes have to do without it, but the goal should
always be to get it.

As others have pointed out already, you don't need to have international
broadband to see benefits. Even local broadband, through, say, an IXP
can give very substantial gains in building local content networks. And
voice connections between local villages ... will still save people a
lot of time walking on poor-quality roads, paying for the post, etc.

> 3. Where should we focus our efforts during the coming 3 years? On ICT
> policy? Creating ICT projects with revenue-generation models that are
> quickly self-supporting? Demonstrating the value of ICT to developing
> country communities?

Yes. ;-) (that's an engineer's answer)

simon





This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[S Woodside]

On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, Pam McLean wrote:

> Ben Parker asked about experiences on solar powered VSAT
> 
> I don't have time to give details now but can't let the question go by
> without brief reference to the Solo. It is designed for rural Africa. I
> saw the second generation prototype during field trials in Oke-Ogun. I
> undertand that some pre-production versions are now under assembly. Not
> being a "techie" I don't know if there is any difference between "VSAT"
> and the satelite connection that Solo was making use of then.

Pam, thanks for the insight. Satellite phones can definitely be used for
internet connections. For many examples try this google search:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22satellite+phone%22+laptop

There's no necessity to use a Solo computer for this ... all of the
satellite phones that provide data will work with any laptop.

There's definitely a difference between VSAT and satellite phone. A VSAT
link is like a leased line ... it's a permanent connection to the
internet that you lease by the month. For the period of the lease you
may use it as often as you like, you can saturate the connection 100% of
the time if you like, the price is fixed at a monthly rate.

With satellite phone you're paying ... buy the minute. Probably a couple
of dollars a minute. So, if your use is sporadic and for very short
periods at a time, it may be cheaper than VSAT. That said, VSAT links
are usually in the range of $100-$300 a month depending on where you
are, that's for the slowest connections of VSAT which are still just as
fast as the fastest satellite phone. Satellite phones max out at 144kbps
but are more typically 9.6kbps, or 56kbps.

> As a potential purchaser I know I won't get hold of one until someone in
> Africa sets up a small, locally financed  company, to do small scale
> assembly (about 100 units a month). The ethos behind Solo development is
> not just to make the *end product* available in rural Africa, but to
> *benefit local economies* and to *enable technology transfer through
> local assembly*. It is an imaginative combination of leading edge
> technology and cottage industry scale assembly! Hurdles to be overcome
> are things like problems relating to getting components through customs,
> and getting a critical mass of initial orders, to give a small company
> the confidence to go forward. That's why I keep plugging the Solo  - I
> want one, and I want the project I support in Oke-Ogun to be able to get
> them - so I need other people to want them too.

I hope you succeed, but I have to say I'm doubtful that the Solo
computer will ultimately prove to be cheaper or better than a laptop.
Keeping in mind that a local economy can develop around laptops too ...
maybe not building but selling, servicing. And most of the world's
laptops are built in just a few factories in Taiwan anyway ;-)

simon


--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
  99% Devil, 1% Angel




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[S Woodside]

On Monday, November 10, 2003, Ben Parker wrote:

> The other major challenge we face in two remote telecentres
> UNICEF supports in southern Sudan (at least two days from the nearest
> telephone) is the generators. These need lots of fuel and oil and are
> prone to breakdown. Regular desktops are much too greedy for solar 
> power as far as I understand, but I would be interested if anyone can 
> share experiences on solar-powered VSAT?

How much power does a VSAT use? Seems like it must be a lot. Desktops
are definitely not a good idea with solar, but laptops would do fine
with a solar power system, since they generally use less than 10 Watts.
Whereas a desktop PC with a monitor draws maybe 100 Watts.

Instead of using VSAT for backhaul, consider using Wi-Fi for backhaul
connection to the internet. WiFi equipment has very light power
requirements -- solar is defintely used to power Wi-Fi installations in
remote locations.

simon


--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
  99% Devil, 1% Angel
  
  



This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[S Woodside]

On Friday, November 7, 2003, at 08:26  AM, Cornelio Hopmann wrote:

> Hence: if the alternative is to connect many (and through-out the
> country) by low-bandwidth or a few with megabyte links, go for the
> first. The latter will come -almost by itself- as technology costs fall
> and demand increases.


I would say rather that the different technologies that are available
are so different and so randomly effective it's impossible to say that
either low-bandwidth or high-bandwidth is better. Pragmatically, a more
scatter-shot approach would have more likelihood of succeeding. Launch
many projects with many technologies. Some will work, some won't. Learn
from the failures and repeat the successes. Every time a new technology
comes along give it a chance.

Not only that, but the high cost of a PC or a laptop needs to be
considered. A PC is expensive, whether it's connected to high-bandwidth
or low. So a substantial sum of the total ICT investment isn't going to
change no matter what the bandwidth plan might be.

simon






This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[S Woodside]

On Thursday, November 6, 2003, at 03:33 AM, Sandra Roberts wrote:

>> 3. Can information distribution centers (e.g., public access
>> telecenters) offer a viable economic solution to a community's
>> information needs, by, in effect, sharing a single high-bandwidth
>> connection among many users, and thus spreading the cost?
>
> Telecentres and community multimedia centres have not fared very well in
> Africa, this is due, in part to exorbitant connection costs, but also
> because they need dynamic leadership. Management and technological
> skills, yes, but leadership which is adaptive to the various conditions
> which a telecentre/ CMC will face during its lifespan.  Unfortunately
> practical barriers include high staff turn over - people with the skills
> to run telecentres could get relatively high paying jobs elsewhere, and
> have more security than telecentres can offer.
> 
> The practical reality is that many telecentres are donor dependent and
> have no plans to become self sustaining, or possibly have plans and
> haven't implemented them.
> 
> So, yes, they can, but practically they often don't.

Hi Sandra can I zoom in on what you say here because it's important to
me too. I have a fairly strong dislike for donor dependent projects. To
my mind there is far greater value as the stewardship of a community ICT
centre is passed over to the community. I also see the problem of people
cutting their teeth at the centre and then leaving for better jobs.

Is that a problem though? One could argue that these are people who are
"turned loose" in the economy (well, provided they remain in the
country, on the continent...) and so presumably that's a success in some
way. On the other hand, as you say, if the key people keep leaving, the
centre is going to have trouble.

It would be nice if there were sufficient reasons for people to stay in
the local area where the centre is. In some way perhaps this could be
achieved by binding the stewardship of the centre into the local
community structure itself. Another way would be to encourage people who
are more likely to stay, to get involved. In other words, make it easier
for people who want to stay local to become key players.

Another thought to me is that the centre need not be an uber-facility.
Decentralized systems form the basis of the internet. Likewise, a centre
could (I think *should*) be working with local businesses that already
have roots in the community, such as local cybercafes (if there are any
..even in a nearby city). Then the goal would be to create an
arms-length relationship with as many different small businesses and
groups as possible, in order to create a virtuous cycle. Instead of
leaving the community, people could move sideways (or even "up") within
the local area.

simon

--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
  99% Devil, 1% Angel





This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD] Flaws in India's Model e-Governance Project

[S Woodside]

On Monday, September 29, 2003, at 07:07 AM, Frederick Noronha (FN)
wrote:

> Dr Richard Heeks, an e-governance expert based at Britain's Manchester
> University, says, "At present, IT is reinforcing more than attacking
> inequality"

vs.

> Bhoomi's pragmatic designer, revenue director and Karnataka's first
> e-secretary Rajeev Chawla,
> As to the illiteracy and gender issues, he says: "IT cannot be held
> responsible for solving all of India's problems."

I don't see any evidence in this article that the system is CREATING
problems, and I do see evidence that it is REDUCING them. People with a
beef often use a time of change to make sure their beef is heard, which
is good, but they should not use that to undermine what is, in balance,
a positive change.

simon





***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] New Book Highlights Priorities for WSIS

[S Woodside]

Nice to see this list is back after the hiatus. I have heard that the
Civil Society groups have been having trouble at the WSIS prepcoms. I do
not see how a world information SOCIETY can be discussed without a full
and adequate treatment of the concerns of the Civil Society
representatives.

simon


On Monday, September 29, 2003, at 09:22 AM, Karen Higgs wrote:

> At the United Nations' World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS),
> to be held in Geneva in December, governments will agree on a
> declaration and action plan that could enhance or hinder access to ICTs
> for the vast majority of the world's population. The Association for
> Progressive Communications (APC) and the CRIS Campaign have been
> following the WSIS process and their publication - "Involving Civil
> Society in ICT Policy: the World Summit on the Information Society" -
> highlights some of the principal issues at stake.
>

--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
  99% Devil, 1% Angel




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] The Phones Keep Ringing in World's Poorest Country

[S Woodside]

Actually I think that Somalia's telecomm grew BECAUSE there is no
national operator. You also see this ironic situation in DRC, where
there are tremendous advances in telecomms despite a totally chaotic
situation. The truth is the telecomm in this era needs competition to
force down prices. I am not generally an advocate of privatization, but
competition in telecomm is essential, and it's got to happen in Africa
quickly.

But, this article then immediately confuses a national operator with a
national regulator, they are completely different. A national regulator
is essential, this is a government department that does not sell
service, they just design policy and regulations. A national operator is
the same thing as a national telecomm company.

One is essential to have (national regulator) the other is essential to
get rid of (national operator).

simon


On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 04:24 PM, Frederick Noronha (FN) wrote:

> Notably, Somalias telecommunications sector grew despite the fact that
> it does not have its own national telecommunications operator, as
> companies merely filled in the void left by the government. But that is
> not a model that wins the approval of experts: the International
> Telecommunication Union (ITU), which closely works with the Somali
> telecoms companies, says the lack of any regulatory body is a big 
> worry.


--
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

[GKD] ANN: Open Spectrum Mailing List

[S Woodside]

Open ICT dot net announces a new mailing list,
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Open Spectrum is the frequencies that supports the use of Wi-Fi/802.11b,
and other wireless internet access technology. Wi-Fi and other wireless
data systems make a very good urban/rural internet access solution, as
shown by the massive growth in Wireless ISP and community wireless
networks. However, in many places regulatory uncertainty leaves its
users at risk. The purpose of this list is to further the proliferation
of good open spectrum policies world-wide.

Topic:
Discussion and community effort towards the proliferation of open
spectrum policy and regulations world-wide (including developing
nations).

Subscribe:
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

List archives and resources on Open Spectrum:
  http://openict.net/projects/openspectrum/

For other projects hosted at Open ICT dot net, please see
  http://openict.net/projects

Please forward this email to anyone I may have missed.

simon

--
openict.net: Open Everything.
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] RFI: Computer Donations To The Third World

[S Woodside]

What about importing to small businesses instead? instead of donating
the computers, provide them at cost to small business owners who can
resell them and provide support services?

simon

On Monday, June 23, 2003, at 12:29 AM, Raju Dev Acharya wrote:

> I totally agree with Guido Sohne. In Nepal I can buy a new PIII for
> US$300. Also importing PC for distribution into the country takes a lot
> of time and effort  due to the never ending red tape and can take
> months. This increases the cost of the PC if the cost incurred in the
> host country is added to the total cost of the donor.
>
>
>  "Guido Sohne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I was in a thread elsewhere that discussed this same issue and I also
>> thought that shipping used PCs makes perfect sense. The problem is the
>> actual cost of the used PCs when other overheads are taken into 
>> account.
>
> ..snip...
>

--
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] Using WiFi for Affordable Access

[S Woodside]

On Thursday, March 13, 2003, at 02:02  AM, Alan Levy wrote:

> And anyone can buy a Pringles potato chip can for
> US$1.50.  It works quite well, actually.  However,
> neither this, nor your links, have anything to do with
> my statements.  Nor can either provide a 2-7km. radius
> of coverage (close to 8-28skm)... and many more things
> important for convergence, and the provisioning of
> applications.  Did you miss this part of the post?

No, not really. It is indeed true that for $100 000 you can buy a very
expensive sectoral array set up that I've seen, that will indeed provide
much higher gain by using many antennas.

However it is much less expensive to set up a standard omni with low
gain, like 3dB, at a central point and then install directional antennas
at client locations. It involves an installation at the client location,
but the total cost for the omni is more like $50 + installation costs,
and the client antennas are also about $50. You could install many such
omnis for the cost of a single sector antenna setup.

> Long haul basically concerns a single directed
> point-to-point transmission, most common for initial
> backhaul operations, and nothing more.  Certainly not
> for a broadcast-type full coverage.  Almost anyone
> technically minded can use any number of technologies
> for this.  There's no magic here.

The interest of the wireless-longhaul list is to use commodity wireless
products to build out long-distance connections. It's possible to span a
few km with an omni at one end and a directional at the other end.

> The homemade WiFi (LAN) clients you are mentioning
> will work well with with 802.11b, but maybe not at all
> with 802.11g.  I'd suggest you stick to the
> established compatible brands, such as Linksys, etc.
> that cost between US$50-200.

Exactly. That cost is affordable for most people, even in the developing
world. Sector antennas are not.

simon


On Monday, March 10, 2003, at 05:34  PM, Alan Levy wrote:

> Any antenna ($10,000 cost)


Err 2.4 GHz WiFi compatible antennas are more like $50-$100 and you
can build your own for $20.

Check out this mailing list:

http://openict.net/projects/wireless-longhaul/

and some useful links:

http://openict.net/projects/wireless-longhaul/wiki/view/AxKit/Links

--
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel





***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] Can WAP Improve Access for Bad Connections?

[S Woodside]

On Monday, March 3, 2003, Dave Harcourt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Most INTERNET sites are "things of beauty" with all sorts of flash, nice
> pictures, images, fonts and whatever that slow down access - one can of
> course set up ones browser to leave out all these nice things, but I
> wonder how often people do?

Even the ICT development sites on the internet are guilty of designing
heavy-weight sites that have lots of images. They also use tables for
layout instead of the newer CSS2 (cascading style sheets) layout
capabilities. That has a double-effect, it adds bloat to the page, and
it also makes it very difficult to decode the flow when you are
accessing the site using a text-only browser like the email gateway or
the lynx browser.

Some sites that have IMHO overloaded graphics and layout:
http://www.digitalopportunity.org/
http://www.worldcomputerexchange.org/
http://www.netaid.org/

I'm working on a site that is intended to have a very light-weight
layout:
http://openict.net/

For a while it was hard to do CSS2 layout that would work in all
browsers, but now there are solutions available, like the one I used for
OpenICT.

Simon




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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:

Re: [GKD] Can WAP Improve Access for Bad Connections?

[S Woodside]

Simon --

My WAP experience was about 2 years ago. At that time it was a dead end
technology because it just technically didn't work very well at all. The
markup language is horrible, and the protocol is also horrible.

XHTML: the idea was to have very small pages that wireless devices can
handle. However most pages on the WWW that claim to be XHTML do not in
fact validate as XML -- that means that the small devices /cannot/ in
fact use them. This is major reason for the movement away from XHTML
back to HTML 4.01 that is going on in some circles (like me!).

Perhaps, though, I am out of date. more below

On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 06:45  AM, Simon Batchelor wrote:

> Many of my colleagues in Africa complain that low bandwidth and poor
> phone connections mean that surfing the internet is not yet a real
> possibility - just a source of frustration.
>
> If I understand WAP correctly, then xhtml pages are being set up which
> are very very small so they can be provided to mobile phones in Europe.
> This seems to be a sort of low bandwidth parrallel internet.
>
> Questions:
>
> First - is my understanding of the "parallel net" correct?
>
> Second - if it is, could we who are in development create a service that
> used basic xhtml software to gather news and in particular development
> news to make it available for people anywhere in the world (ie not
> mobile phone restricted) who have a PC with a bad phone connection to
> the internet.  Or has someone done that and I am not aware of it.

If you are asking, could you create a lightweight internet service that
aggregates news and information for people with poor internet
connections, then yes. There are many ways to accomplish this. Perhaps
the easiest is simply with the existing web infrastructure. Using CSS2
and HTML 4.01 it is possible to create very light-weight sites that load
very quickly ... see sohne.net and openict.net for examples. If you can
convince existing sites to move to the CSS2 layout model, reduce their
use of graphics to a minimum (and within a year, switch to SVG which can
be very low bandwidth, once it is supported). So many of the "ICT
development" sites out there have /huge/ layout overhead that must make
display and download very slow indeed for those on a poor modem
connection. I need not give examples, virtually all of them are guilty!


Simon




***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization***
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: