Subject: Re: Markle initiative for universal e-mail
Sam Simon (sam@simon.net)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:38:20 -0400
Message-Id: <02ca01bd6a0e$77eab9c0$4904b0cf@valv1cas4de4y.cais.com> From: "Sam Simon" <sam@simon.net> To: <roundtable@cni.org> Subject: Re: Markle initiative for universal e-mail Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:38:20 -0400
On Thu, April 16, 1998, Karen Coyle <karen.coyle@ucop.edu> wrote:
>
> On 4/16/98, Sam Simon <sam@simon.net> wrote:
> >
> > The goal of universal e-mail is, I agree, an outdated concept. It
> > is, for all practical purpsoes nerly here.
>
> I disagree with that. I don't consider a figure of 40% of the
> population to be "universal," yet that's what I recall as the latest
> estimate of people with email access. (Many of whom have that access
> only at work, BTW, where personal use may be disallowed.)
>
> > What we need to focus on is the next generation of communiation, high
> > speed, interactive video/audio/grphics over easy to use and affordable
> > home devices.
>
> "Devices" are not the crux of the access problem, nor are high-speed
> lines. The problems we face are much more complex than equipment - they
> are human and social. If you are literate, healthy and English-speaking
> you have a pretty good chance of getting online and make use of the Net.
> If you aren't, then you have great barriers to access. Literacy is a
> huge barrier - one that is not a problem with telephone use. Same with
> being English-speaking: two speakers of Urdu can do fine over the
> telephone, but will have a great deal of trouble communicating over an
> ASCII-based keyboard device.
>
> Now someone's going to come back and tell me that we'll soon have voice
> recognition and computers and getting cheaper and easier, etc., etc.
> Well, frankly, I don't give a damn... to hear about solutions that
> don't exist yet and that we can't have an impact on. Although universal
> e-mail may, in and of itself, sound like something from way back in 1995
> or so (which I believe is the original Rand report), it has the
> advantage of being an activity that we can actually organize around and
> something that we can accomplish today. Solving that problem would lead
> us to solve many other problems as well, like those of education and
> training. The main thing is that we need a buy-in to something we can
> DO, not just another "if we wait long enough, the technology will solve
> it all" approach.
Karen,
I agree it is not an "either or" world. Indeed, there is plenty of work
to be done still around getting telephone's into homes of those who
can't afford them. There is work to do in rural areas to get cooper
lines that are capable of carrying data traffic at 28.8 BPS.
Indeed, the FCC's definition of universal service is moving in the
direction of prescribing lines closer to 2400 baud rather than 28.8.
And, so, yes, there are many people who don't have "access" to e-mail
for a wide variety of reasons. However, most libraries today have
computers for e-mail, infrastructure is developing to allow more broad
based access, and there is plenty of commercial reasons to add that on.
It isn't over, but the question where to expend the resources for moving
a public policy / public interest agenda.
It is my view that Mary's point that we should keep our eye on the
ultimate goal of broadband, high speed access to every home is the
right one. It isn't meant to belittle other efforts nor is it to be
exclusive. However, in a world of scarce resources, it is an argument
for Markle to rethink how it is spending its money.
Sam
_______________
Samuel A. Simon
President
Issue Dynamics, Inc.
901 15th St. N.W. Suite 230 202-408-1400 (v) 202-408-1134 (fax)
Washington, DC 200005
http://www.idi.net/ sam@simon.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Tue Mar 23 1999 - 03:33:24 EST