On 15/04/2008, Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 14:18 +1000, Martin Visser wrote: > > Also do they actually need to carry the data with them? It would seem > > if the ratio of data owners to intelligent devices/readers is so high, > > you really come back to simply needing a card number ala Medicare - or > > maybe even something like a "tinyurl" only a little more human > > rememberable.The client then just needs to recite their number/tinurl. > > > > This assumes that the reader device has real-time (or maybe near > > real-time is good enough, access to the data storage. (And near real > > -time may be good enough - 1 000 000 users with 10 K data each is > > "only" 10G - easily replicated on all your reader devices - assuming > > the data doesn't change all that often. > > > I'm inferring that the scheme being developed is something like the > following: > > * At each village/town there is a single low-capability but functional > pc. It has no reliable network.
Not quite. A person will arrive by motorcycle, probably once per week, with a laptop in tow. They'll have about an hour to sort out the people there before departing to the next settlement. At the end of the day/week, they'll return to base and synchronise their laptop with the central system. > * The data owners want to be able to track e.g. taxes, accounts, small > personal data. Mostly simple financial data, like a passbook. > * They want to be able to use this data where *they* are, not where a > specific reader device is. As mentioned above, the reader comes to them. As mentioned previously, this is for the developing world. The current system is very manual: paper and pen. It's very laborious, and open to errors and even fraud. We're looking for a simple and reliable digital replacement. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
