-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
I have been working away on various things during the last couple of weeks, and one was how mobile phones could be used as ICT (Information and Communication Technology) solutions in developing nations.
http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/shane/communicating_freely/the_mobile_office
The blog post is "fluid," in that I've put out the idea and will be revising the article based on feedback. It's not finished (and perhaps I have some horrific typos), but it's far enough along that I wanted other people to see it. Let's call it professional suicide.
Shane
- -- Shane Martin Coughlan e: shane@shaneland.co.uk m: +447773180107 w: www.shaneland.co.uk - --- Projects: http://mobility.opendawn.com http://gem.opendawn.com http://enigmail.mozdev.org http://www.winpt.org - --- Organisations: http://www.fsfeurope.org http://www.fsf.org http://www.labour.org.uk http://www.opensourceacademy.gov.uk - --- OpenPGP: http://www.shaneland.co.uk/personalpages/shane/files/publickey.asc
On 20/04/06, Shane M. Coughlan shane@shaneland.co.uk wrote:
I have been working away on various things during the last couple of weeks, and one was how mobile phones could be used as ICT (Information and Communication Technology) solutions in developing nations.
http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/shane/communicating_freely/the_mobile_office
The blog post is "fluid," in that I've put out the idea and will be revising the article based on feedback. It's not finished (and perhaps I have some horrific typos), but it's far enough along that I wanted other people to see it. Let's call it professional suicide.
Shane,
That was interesting "commute home" reading. Nice article. My thoughts below....
<quote> There is a gross inequality in the distribution of empowering Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Access to productivity and communication solutions is currently the domain of the richest one sixth of the world, with the remaining five sixths remaining resolutely disenfranchised with regards personal computing, mobile communication, and instant processing of information.
This is the 'Digital Divide,' an unnecessarily damaging situation where the people who most need productivity solutions are unable to obtain them. In effect, the vast majority of the human race is condemned to prolonged poverty and inefficient economic, political and social solutions due to neglect and a lack of effort with regards sharing technology. </quote>
This is quite obviously true, but it is equally true of all other aspects of the developing world.
Maybe your statement is more relevant to the social, industrial and economic aspects than the ICT aspect as this form of technology is fairly young, whilst the developing world has been slipping further behind the West for decades or even centuries.
My question (most probably a rhetorical question) is from a technology point of view how can we break this cycle, where people don't have access to affordable technology (or healthcare, social support) because of their poverty which in turn drags them further behind the rest of the world and deeper into poverty?
<quote> The second option (of providing usable VGA output on a phone) is viable, but requires a certain level of commitment from manufacturers to introduce an output port on all new mobile phones. The port would be designed to work in conjunction with a special cable to allow connection from the mobile phone to the aerial input on a television set. </quote>
Obviously your plan describes a possible solution that would have to occur during the next few generations of mobile phones - not least because people would have to own and use the phone to then donate it for recycling to the developing world.
When we look at how much more advanced phone displays are today as compared to 3 generations of devices ago I am sure that they will be capable of running advanced applications in a usable resolution in full colour.
However the output interface you describe you have to be either a) developed and implemented by device vendors specifically for the idea that consumers will donate the phone or b) the output to TV interface will have a useful function for the original owner.
Not only would the interface have to be useful to the original owner I suspect the phone vendor will have to be able to sell services based around people wanting to watch their phone via the TV set. Seeing people watching movies on their PSPs riding the London Underground this may be a reality someday, but I think that is a barrier there.
If we look at the functionality of phones today and the technology available I can see a "version 1.0" to your plan that you described in the paper.
Phones today have the following characteristics
* They can output the full ASCII alphabet (or at least common alphanumeric characters and a host of commas, semi colons etc etc)
* Predictive texting
* They have SMS functionality
* They have network access over GSM and possibly GPRS
* They have voice capability
Could governments in developing countries provide a telephony interface to services using commands sent by SMS, or possibly voice recognition software.
When I bought a digital certificate recently I was emailed and told to phone a number and complete a registration process on the phone. The system was fully automated and it recognised the registration code and my name verbally.
As a user of a Blackberry (which admittedly is a richer interface than a standard phone) I regularly access a bash session over MobileSSH and GPRS. I'm not suggesting we teach the entire developing world /bin/bash but you could develop any text based system you wanted and allow people to access it over a thin SSH client
I also have a Cisco 7940 phone which has a on screen "web browser" which is very light on functionality. It is driven by an up button, down button, enter button and a cancel button.
However I can easily check the BBC news headlines on it, weather information and other services so it is useful.
I believe that technology could be brought to the people you described in your article based on todays technology, but the methods you described would be the next generation of the concept.
Thanks
-- ~sm Jabber: mozrat@gmail.com www: http://beerandspeech.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Simon Morris wrote:
My question (most probably a rhetorical question) is from a technology point of view how can we break this cycle, where people don't have access to affordable technology (or healthcare, social support) because of their poverty which in turn drags them further behind the rest of the world and deeper into poverty?
There appears to be only one way to break this cycle, and that is to create sustainable infrastructure in developing nations. Aid, either in the form of money or food, has tended to be an ineffective and short-term comfort for nations in crisis.
The provision of sustainable infrastructure is tricky. Developing nations often lack the facilities to developing base infrastructure on their own, and creating infrastructure for them does not address the issue of sustainability. The developing nation must be able to self-maintain the infrastructure elements it inherits or implements. It could be argued therefore that two things are key when it comes to helping out developing nations: willing infrastructure donors, and methods of ensuring the developing nation can provide the people and resources to maintain the infrastructure.
When we address technology this gets very complex. Many developed nations have difficulty dealing with technology infrastructure, let alone developing nations. Spare parts, future development and support infrastructure are dependent on relatively few manufacturing companies. The gadgets tend to cost a lot of money both to purchase and maintain.
I would suggest that there is no easy way to provide sustainable technological infrastructure to nations that inherently cannot afford it. We cannot solve the problem in a neat way. On the other hand, there is no reason we should expect to.
The problems that developing nations face are not problems we will solve this generation. Our commitment - as developed nations - must take this into account. We need to provide education, resources, tools and experts. Technology is essential to helping develop effective logistics and providing modern education, but it's a far out part of the overall infrastructure picture. We're going to have to pour a massive amount of resources into initial provision, training and support in political, social and technological arenas before any developing nations are going to reach the point of technological infrastructure sustainability.
Perhaps the question is not really *how* we can do that, so much as *will* we do that. Our commitment to developing nations has been patchy at best, and genuine infrastructure provision is a massive operation.
However the output interface you describe you have to be either a) developed and implemented by device vendors specifically for the idea that consumers will donate the phone or b) the output to TV interface will have a useful function for the original owner. Not only would the interface have to be useful to the original owner I suspect the phone vendor will have to be able to sell services based around people wanting to watch their phone via the TV set. Seeing people watching movies on their PSPs riding the London Underground this may be a reality someday, but I think that is a barrier there.
Correct. However, there are several reasons that manufacturers could use as justification for the inclusion of the additional hardware support.
1) The video output would allow slide shows and videos for consumers in developing nations. This is something that might prove 'sellable' to people. Apple managed it with their iPod photo, and this could be considered in the same way.
2) The addition of two relatively low-cost hardware extensions would provide tools for developing nations. Perhaps these future functions could be sold as human eco-system additions. I guess it would depend o selling the idea that we need to recycle phones into developing nations, and asking consumers in developing nations to shoulder the additional 50 pence or a pound the extra hardware would cost to include.
If we look at the functionality of phones today and the technology available I can see a "version 1.0" to your plan that you described in the paper. Phones today have the following characteristics
- They can output the full ASCII alphabet (or at least common
alphanumeric characters and a host of commas, semi colons etc etc)
- Predictive texting
- They have SMS functionality
- They have network access over GSM and possibly GPRS
- They have voice capability
Could governments in developing countries provide a telephony interface to services using commands sent by SMS, or possibly voice recognition software.
[snip]
As a user of a Blackberry (which admittedly is a richer interface than a standard phone) I regularly access a bash session over MobileSSH and GPRS. I'm not suggesting we teach the entire developing world /bin/bash but you could develop any text based system you wanted and allow people to access it over a thin SSH client
The voice command software does depend on rather expensive systems at the other end of the line, but then again...such systems can serve a lot of people in relatively little time, and they can do so 24 hours a day. For certain aspect of technological infrastructure such a system could be useful.
Using a think SSH client over mobile networks could provide some basic text services. Perhaps word processing, simple spreadsheets or databases. Bandwidth would be a problem with any form of rich sorting or data input, so it would be limited by that...but could be an extension of what people have right now. It would be an incremental improvement, providing another step down the path of technological infrastructure.
I believe that technology could be brought to the people you described in your article based on todays technology, but the methods you described would be the next generation of the concept.
You may well be right there. What I suggested depended on two things: hardware extensions (a relatively minor issue) and significant development of software tools. I imagine that the development of these tools could be on-going, but is still likely to consume time. It might be possible to make a word processor and basic web browser today, but before a true mobile office suite could be realised a lot of work would have to be done. It's not as simple as cutting and pasting Openoffice.org code :) Based on the proposed methodology of the article, the software is provided by very light-weight services that can call each other as needed. It's about really modular design on top of an exceptionally light framework, with the whole design intended to reduce processor and memory overhead. It works on the assumption that most of the time people don't really use their CPU.
What you suggest is pushing forward today's technology - without modification and with minor edtension - while casting our eye towards more elaborate developments in the future. I could certainly nod my head at that. If we can extend the utility people get out of existing hardware, and introduce useful and timely new technology in a realistic timescale, I think we're doing something very useful.
Shane
- -- Shane Martin Coughlan e: shane@shaneland.co.uk m: +447773180107 w: www.shaneland.co.uk - --- Projects: http://mobility.opendawn.com http://gem.opendawn.com http://enigmail.mozdev.org http://www.winpt.org - --- Organisations: http://www.fsfeurope.org http://www.fsf.org http://www.labour.org.uk http://www.opensourceacademy.gov.uk - --- OpenPGP: http://www.shaneland.co.uk/personalpages/shane/files/publickey.asc
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 10:23 +0100, Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/shane/communicating_freely/the_mobile_office
The blog post is "fluid," in that I've put out the idea and will be revising the article based on feedback. It's not finished (and perhaps I have some horrific typos), but it's far enough along that I wanted other people to see it. Let's call it professional suicide.
Isn't this just the same idea Bill Gates had a few months ago?
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/technology/microsoft_cellphones/index.htm
Cheers,
Alex.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Alex Hudson wrote:
Isn't this just the same idea Bill Gates had a few months ago?
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/technology/microsoft_cellphones/index.htm
Wow! I don't remember seeing that :) Thanks Alex. I guess I must have encountered it somewhere?
They mention a Microsoft Research report in the article, but don't provide any links. I have googled, and came up with this link: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2006/feb06/02-23Inclusion.mspx
MS had a competition to generate ideas for Digital Inclusion. It looks like they generated a significant amount of research, though it's not clear if they will follow through with product development.
Shane
- -- Shane Martin Coughlan e: shane@shaneland.co.uk m: +447773180107 w: www.shaneland.co.uk - --- Projects: http://mobility.opendawn.com http://gem.opendawn.com http://enigmail.mozdev.org http://www.winpt.org - --- Organisations: http://www.fsfeurope.org http://www.fsf.org http://www.labour.org.uk http://www.opensourceacademy.gov.uk - --- OpenPGP: http://www.shaneland.co.uk/personalpages/shane/files/publickey.asc
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 10:14 +0100, Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
Alex Hudson wrote:
Isn't this just the same idea Bill Gates had a few months ago?
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/technology/microsoft_cellphones/index.htm
Wow! I don't remember seeing that :) Thanks Alex. I guess I must have encountered it somewhere?
Well, I think it's been thought of a couple of times previously to be honest - I remember seeing something a while ago about plugging mobiles into TVs for the purpose of running video games (might have been stuff about Nokia ngage, I can't recall).
I always thought the phone would be a bad way of doing this.
I would think in most communities, especially in large continents like Africa, people would generally receive TV over a satellite link. Satellite set-top boxes already have the TV output hardware, they sometimes run Free operating systems, have modems and serial ports, and could easily be adapted to allow a keyboard and/or mouse to be plugged in (in fact, Sky systems have come with keyboards in the past). Because they're bigger and don't have the same mobile size constraints, they could also be made cheaper, and the cost of providing general purpose computing facility would likely be most a software one, compared to the extra hardware required in a mobile phone.
Savvy satellite operators could include satellite broadband systems, which would mean that they no longer have to access the internet over some scummy 28k8 system or something, but can get a system with some real download bandwidth.
Granted it's not as portable as a mobile, but a mobile which requires a TV and keyboard to work as a computer isn't really a portable computer unlike the OLPC. Plus, they're still going to need both satellite TV and mobile phones.
I'm not totally sold on the TV as an output device. Contrary to the figures you quoted, the maximum horizontal resolution for text is somewhere in the region of 400/500 pixels, sometimes less (many older TVs start losing focus, which isn't noticeable on most TV programmes, but very noticeable on computer displays). Plus, the 576 vertical display isn't really either - it's 288 lines per scan, then interlaced. Reading text on an interlaced screen can be horrendous. So, you're talking somewhere nearer QVGA than VGA in my opinion, and mobile phones are already at that resolution (I hear there's a VGA one coming out soon too).
I also thought that the OLPC project would be better served trying to make a more up-to-date version of the Psion Series 3 or something - those things lasted for weeks on two AA batteries, and you could get some really good software for them. I'm sure I bought mine for something less than £200, and they were always pretty niche machines.
Cheers,
Alex.