Re: [GKD] The $100 Computer is Key to India's Technology Fortunes

[Vickram Crishna]

On 28/7/05, Mark Summer wrote:

> It's already pretty easy to build computers from off-the-shelf
> components that consume less then 20 Watts, and at prices below $400,
> including keyboard, mouse and display.

Well, of course at Inveneo, Mark is very familiar with low power
computing, and the List knows that the Jhai PC is showing the way to
practical sub-10W devices.

In India, some of us are attempting to flesh out a new synergy between
computing and communication. The successful paradigm is the public call
phone, a low cost communication device for the edge which was made more
accessible by sharing its total cost of ownership among many users
(readers on this List will know that this was perhaps the most
significant enabler for extending the Indian economy out to rural and
remote areas in the early '90s). I submit that there are no serious
technological barriers left to extending this model to a low power
computing edge device, one that can be shared between many users in a
group or community, while individuals will own or possess much cheaper
individual devices, that provide either an interface or an
identification - or both.

Very clearly, the cheapest known medium for clear communication is FM
wireless, for which the spectrum between 87.5 and 108 MHz is already set
internationally, and devices are made cheaply in most manufacturing
economies. Other spectra, such as 2.4 GHz and 5.1 GHz, are also emerging
rapidly (in the sense that they are beginning to be freely usable all
around the world). Having such a medium available provides for rapid
technological development and manufacture, which brings down costs. The
Simputer is not yet that ideal edge device, but arguably the hurdle yet
to be straddled is a middle infrastructure layer of shared computing -
relevant server centric applications and pervasive wideband inexpensive
or free connectivity.

-- 
Vickram




***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: How Can A "Grassroots" Project Obtain Financing From Private Donors In Rich Countries?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 6/24/05, Gena Fleming wrote:

> Currently, people in need of funding need to do quite a bit of sleuthing
> to find funding sources. Can we create an alternative? I am imagining a
> website which showcases a diversity of projects through photos and brief
> descriptions (women's rights, sustainable water purification,
> permaculture, medicinal gardens, etc.) so that individuals who want to
> donate can get an overview of a diversity of sustainable projects around
> the world and choose specific projects they would like to donate
> directly to, without the mediation of individual foundations. I think
> this would serve the dual purpose of offering a new vision of a
> sustainable world, while helping donors feel more personally connected
> and involved with projects to which they are donating financial support.

It is definitely a great idea. From my experience, it is precisely the
'alignment' that takes place with individual mediating organisations
that results in some amount of dilution of purpose for the grassroots
players: your 'marketplace' (souk, bazaar, eBay) model provides an
alternative.

However, even that bazaar needs support - hosting, design, bug-fixing,
the main tech issues, and other broader issues like certification,
ratings, ancillary commercial issues and the like. We should discuss
ways and means of getting this off the ground in a workable manner.

-- 
Vickram




***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-DOTCOM] Local Governments Should Adopt a Business Model

[Vickram Crishna]

On 6/7/05, Edward Cherlin wrote:

> Spot on. We install a national wireless network reaching to the
> villages, and one computer per village to get things moving. This allows
> local farmers to access world prices and increase their revenues, as in
> the ICT e-choupal project. Then, again as with ICT, we or somebody
> creates an e-commerce portal to sell to the villages. What the villagers
> need is essentially everything, in the same way that the first Sears
> catalog offered everything that a household needed to everybody in the
> US within buggy or cart range of a railroad station
>
> Would any existing organizations taking part in this discussion like to
> create a piece of this project?


A project I am associated with already has some pieces of this concept
in place. What is lacking right now are sufficient computers and
connectivity. My part is the latter, while the computers are apparently
going to be installed in a big way across the command area by the
government, under a local government support scheme, later this year.

A commerce portal, supporting offline transactions, has already been
created by CDAC and is being tested, while other pieces of locally
developed software relate to local self government needs, both data
collection and information dissemination. Others in India may take it
from CDAC as well - I do not know what CDAC's policy is on disseminating
or supporting this application internationally.

In my opinion it is too early to comment on the impact of this project.
However, this list generates so many ideas I am sure that they will
continue to be welcome and, equally, as more applications are developed
and their usefulness examined, I am sure these will become available to
others who want to have similar modules working on their own Very Wide
networks.

> It is not actually required that governments understand ahead of time.
> Staying out of the way and allowing someone else to do it is sufficient.
> However, if we can convince local government that it is in their
> interest to be civic boosters (another 19th century concept) and to grow
> the local economy, and thus get their cooperation, we can do many things
> better, faster, and cheaper.

Frankly, although the project design involves local government right
from the onset, the actual cooperation needed (mostly in terms of
staying out of the way) is from both state and central government
departments, mostly because of hangovers of both attitude and of
antediluvian regulations that need to be modified or junked.

-- 
Vickram




***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-DOTCOM] RFI: IT Training Curriculum for Rural Community Local Government

[Vickram Crishna]

On 5/20/05, Femi Oyesanya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:

> What ICT training curriculum do you then introduce to the leadership of,
> take for example, a tribe of nomads, so that he/she can begin to think
> of policies that will use IT to improve rural livelihood ?

I have been thinking about the essential dichotomy between our
urbanised, land-centric view of ICT and the cultures of nomadism. While
it seems true that the twain don't meet, it is also true that we need to
ensure that nomadism as a way of life not be allowed to vanish. To do
this, certainly nomads need to be armored against the creeping growth of
landowners.

Is ICT going to be another of those tendrils?

I believe not, provided the tools can be developed by and placed within
the controls of nomads themselves. But how can this happen, if the
landowning cultures are the only ones looking for ways to deliver these
tools?

Nomads too live by rules, only those aren't the same rules as
landowners. Current ICT propositions are based on the kind of rules with
which fixed-property societies exist. I fear neither hardware nor
software solutions exist that truly deliver intelligent edge devices to
people who aren't locked to land. I am not sure we have here on this
List people who were once from such cultures, who can at least opine
with some authority on such a topic. I hope I am wrong.

-- 
Vickram




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 past messages, see:
http://www.dot-com-alliance.org/archive.html

Re: [GKD] Sneaking Up on the $100 Computer

[Vickram Crishna]

On 3/2/05, Sam Lanfranco wrote:

> There is no need to detail all these options here except to note that a
> significant, necessary, and important component to in-vehicle telematics
> is the need for voice-to-voice interaction between the driver and
> onboard systems. This is necessary for safe driving since using a
> keyboard, or giving attention to a screen, while driving, is not a good
> idea.

My 90 paise (IRs).

The keyboard of course, is hardly an essential I/O instrument or device,
considering the range of alternatives being developed in parallel
streams (think mobile devices, but also think of the large number of
devices being researched and developed for the severely disabled). I am
thinking, however, more about the screen itself.

There is hardly any good reason to consider that the 'screen' *not* be
the primary interface for observation of the external environment,
rather than the fairly useless, if not actually counterproductive,
square meters of glass that current vehicles use. Compare this with the
ratio of glass used in a modern aircraft, for instance. And also
consider that, at least in a fighter aircraft, the see-through glass is
also used as a reflective medium for I/O - the head-up display.

I think that future vehicles will use far more 'smart glass' as compared
to 'dumb glass' (ie the kind you just look through, and that does not
add actual value), and that this will have serendipitous results for
computing in general.

None of the above is intended to deduct from Sam's comments about voice
I/O.

-- 
Vickram




***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 $100 Computer: A Polite Scam

[Vickram Crishna]

On 2/22/05, Edward Cherlin wrote:

> On Thursday, 10 February 2005, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
> 
>> Dear Colleagues,
>> 
>> The $100 computer for those on the other side of the digital divide has
>> once again surfaced in what are mainly self-promoting (occasionally well
>> intended) pronouncements from various quarters.
> 
> You might enjoy (well, that isn't the right word, but never mind) the
> recent novel "Air" by Geoff Ryman, which describes the consequences of
> dumping every villager in the world on the Net without warning. Of
> course, it would be a disaster. That's why we don't plan to do it that
> way.
..snip...
> Yes, that's where the comparison with "Air" comes in. Just giving people
> computers and going away would accomplish less than nothing. Compare,
> however, the Grameen Bank program for placing cell phones in villages.
> The villagers are first brought up to a functioning level of literacy,
> then taught the rudiments of business and banking, and then they get to
> take out a loan, buy a phone, and start selling minutes. The same, but
> more so, is an absolute requirement for placing computers in villages.

That has always been the real stumbling block - whether it is through
the useless unstaffed and unhoused village schools of India, or the
political football schools in Pakistan, or elsewhere - there is little
incentive to bring literacy/education to the disadvantaged.

What sticks in the craw is the unstated assumption that *we* privileged
IT-aware people can, on our own, bring blessings to the *stupid*
untutored poor. This is why, at Radiophony, we advocate empowering poor
people with their own low cost, low power FM stations, where the user
devices cost under a dollar in real street prices, and the central
dissemination device under $50. At those costs, putting in the extras
(training, maintenance, economic wrappers) become feasible on a large
scale. Networking those inputs creates synergy and serendipity - who
better than the information users to tell *us* what the necessary
information devices should be? Or better still, learn to join *us* in
developing those devices.

-- 
Vickram




***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] A Nigerian Farmer Using ICTs to Seek Information

[Vickram Crishna]

On 1/21/05, "Scott Kleinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> If there are no sources of used machinery, perhaps he could lease
> something -- using the funds he has to pay the lease for a specified
> time -- with an option to buy later at a specified price.  Often you may
> be able to apply some of the leasing funds to the purchase price. It may
> not be what he wants, but it may be what's available.

Just to let you know, India has very recently licensed the manufacture
of an indigenously designed small tractor. I need to do some research to
locate the details, but the design has been partly sponsored by the
Department of Science and Technology through its entrepreneurship
program (TePP). The machine is specifically meant for affordability -
small holdings are the norm in India, and such farmers have either been
left out of the development matrix or beggar themselves trying to hook
into 'shared resource' mechanisation (tragically, nature refuses to
cooperate with such well conceived schemes, and cussedly, all the
farmers in an area need to plow just about the same day).
-- 
Vickram




***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] Should "Developed" Countries Subsidize the Internet for LDCs?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 1/11/05, Medard Gabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> A Thought experiment / Cost/benefit question:
> 
> What would it cost (ball park estimate) to provide everyone in the world
> with broad band Internet access?
..snip...
> Building the high-speed wireless connection devices (or wired ones where
> appropriate and economical) will be a huge market and benefit (subsidy?)
> to the global telecommunications industry. Manufacturing the computers
> and/or Internet access devices in the developing countries where the
> products will be used would provide jobs, infrastructure, and
> technological expertise. Training the technicians for installation,
> maintenance, and upgrading of the network and its access technology
> would provide additional jobs and expertise to the developing country.
> Providing electricity for Internet access through solar cells and other
> decentralized energy production technologies would provide electricity
> for a host of other important basic human needs devices, such as
> lighting, water pumping, and refrigeration.

Please don't forget the very real cost of fixing legislation and
regulation that militates against low cost and collaborative networks in
developing countries (well, in developed countries too, but ).

The global telecom industry is geared to picking low hanging fruit, and
spends a lot of money on 'education' to ensure that local pricing
(extortionary) and competition (cartelised) remains convenient.

In India, for instance, although we have had an IX (internetworking data
exchange) in place for two years, its share of local traffic is
completely minimal due to bad policies - so ISPs pay international rates
for most emails and the local share of hosting is abysmal - and
consumers pay more. The total PC penetration remains incredibly low and
Internet usage pathetic - though most people think that India is a cyber
superpower - we are far from it.

-- 
Vickram




***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] NGOs and Free Software

[Vickram Crishna]

On 12/22/04, Sam Lanfranco wrote:

> Many of these take place in areas where markets fail to work properly,
> in any event.

And where on this planet exactly do markets work 'properly', without
hedging them with consumer-protecting regulatory provisions?

-- 
Vickram




***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-DOTCOM] Win-Win Business Models

[Vickram Crishna]

On 12/1/04, Peter Burgess wrote:

> My current view is that we need to start looking very hard at how human
> resources in communities can be used best to produce the most ... and
> then market to get the most cash revenue  and at the end have the
> most value for the community as a whole.

I have probably said something like this before, and so have Lee Thorn
and others too, but the first 'we' in the phrases above gains immensely
in power if it (a) actually includes a large dollop of local
participation and (b) is seen to do so.

Doing that in practice involves long gestation periods for the first
project and the first success, and even later will continue to involve a
lot of engagement, as long as further money and skills are necessary.
Disengaging from making resources 'available', moving to the
self-sustaining replicable stage where resources are only 'listed', to
be made available against a negotiated demand, is the next level.

Very few corporations have the stomach for the long haul, or rather,
perceive that they do. The current trend towards short-term goals and
reporting that is sweeping the world, coupled with the growth by
acquisition of mega-corporations, is an unsettling portend. We need to
hear about and to help create more examples of what the genuinely
engaged corporations do, rather than what the well-heeled claim to do
(to the echoing kudos of an adoring media), if the possibilities of
win-win are to become truly replicable.

-- 
Vickram




***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-DOTCOM] Win-Win Business Models

[Vickram Crishna]

On 11/19/04, Lee Thorn wrote:

> The hard work of the people in Phon Kham and elsewhere in Lao PDR cannot
> be over-emphasized. They defined the problems to be addressed, they
> searched for solutions that fit their situation, they helped us define
> and test their solution and worked hard to achieve permission for the
> first site, and we partnered with them to develop the business tools to
> make the project sustainable. This, I believe, is the most important
> information in this piece. End users defined the problem and helped
> solve it. We expect this in each implementation. End users are involved
> from day one.

Involvement in any leading edge kind of developmental activity is only
meaningful if knowledge and understanding is at a high level.
Unfortunately, most societies and communities have an enormous hangover
of half-baked knowledge (even this one, if we are willing to be
objective about the quality of our own posts). In the case of the
countries of the African and Asian continents, this is overlaid by the
colonial experience, one that encouraged the suppression of independent
thought and fostered huge dependencies.

I was struck by Lee's mention of a single village, and the clear
reference to time and patience, both of which lead inescapably to the
points I have made above.

For that matter, even if we step back and look at how US and European 
corporations (and there have been significant differences in approach 
within the two groups) have automated their business processes over 
the years using ICT, it is clear that there has a been a very long 
and gradual learning curve, punctuated by concerns expressed over and 
over about ROI.

How much more important then to exercise patience and expect long-term
engagement, if one is to meaningfully achieve anything in regions and
with peoples that have been kept out of the loop since time immemorial?
And top-down or trickle-down approaches just aren't the way, they tend
to exacerbate existing divides and differences that usually have
overtones of oppression and injustice.

-- 
Vickram




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by USAID's dot-ORG Cooperative
Agreement with AED, in partnership with World Resources Institute's
Digital Dividend Project, and hosted by GKD.
http://www.dot-com-alliance.org and http://www.digitaldividend.org
provide 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
Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at:

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Is Profitability Essential for Sustainability?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 11/12/04, Kris Dev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For any project or venture to be successful, there has to be a return on
> investment, tangible or intangible. Without this, the initiative is
> deemed unproductive and hence a waste.
> 
> Preferably, for sustainability, at least the variable cost should be
> covered fully. If it covers either a part or fully the fixed cost, it is
> ideal.

Who can argue with this?

But how is the cost to be met, there lies the difficulty and also to a
large extent the disconnect between what works in one place and doesn't
work in another.

When I pick up a phone in India, I hear a certain kind of dial tone,
which is quite different in the US and UK. I don't remember which place,
it's a few years now, but I recall hearing a tone somewhere that made me
get upset, thinking the phone wasn't working at all.

Similarly, if a project does not return more rupees and paise, or
dollars and cents if you prefer, than what is put into it, I could
conceivably get upset. But only if I wasn't prepared to think that maybe
there are other paybacks taking place, just that my monetary or even my
measurement system hasn't learned to be flexible or inclusive enough.

I notice that most postings about 'social' benefits are dismissed as
wishy-washy thinking, and cannot help but wonder why this is so? What is
so difficult for an economist to quantify about spinoffs? A lot of long
term R&D - like the space program for instance - is almost solely
justified by the remarkable spinoffs we already enjoy in daily life -
just that there was no decent model in place for NASA to recover its
investments other than from space exploration (for which sadly its
record has not been unblemished, but let's not go there in this forum).

Maybe a lot of modern economists are shy about acknowledging social
benefits - do they think this will label them as socialists?

Seems to me that most corporate models of growth - and definitely those
of publicly held companies whose shares are listed in heavily trafficked
exchanges - are driven by such short term indicators that they cannot
find any way of acknowledging in their balance sheets the work they do,
and therefore too often don't do, to ensure that they are a part of
society and not some kind of adjunct to it.

Such a model leads us to a self-destructive way of doing things, whereby
corporate funds get spent on ensuring that all the obstacles to
'efficiency' are swept aside, be it through payments directly to
affordable GOs and/or NGOs, or indirectly. We keep seeing this in India,
where the share of the organised sector is still a small fraction of the
total economy. I can only imagine that it is far worse in more
'developed' economies. Some of the vignettes from documentaries like
'Bowling for Columbine' hint that such a surmise is not that far off
target.

My discussions with academicians from Indian management institutions (of
which I am myself a product, or alumnus, as they prefer to put it)
indicates that there is no space for thinking beyond these narrow
confines. The result is that young bright minds are led like sheep into
the well paying corporate sector, when the obvious need for measuring
and building productivity outside the corporate sphere is much much
greater.

I don't have a better model to suggest, but am certainly dissatisfied
that the model of profitability we are discussing here is sufficient or
even necessary to serve the purpose.

-- 
Vickram




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by USAID's dot-ORG Cooperative
Agreement with AED, in partnership with World Resources Institute's
Digital Dividend Project, and hosted by GKD.
http://www.dot-com-alliance.org and http://www.digitaldividend.org
provide 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
Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at:

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Can Technology and a Business Approach Make Globalization Work for the Poor?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 10/28/04, Ed Deak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> While you are talking about the wonderful effects of hi tech etc. on
> farming communities, what will happen to these millions who still had
> something while they were on their lands, but now have nothing in city
> slums ?

And that's only farming.

Over ten years since economist Mahbub Al Haq created the Human
Development Index and yet no perceptible appreciation of the very
different, perhaps permanently, clashing economic systems that
constitute 'cash' and 'non-cash'. We appear to have been permanently
seduced (we = those living in the literate world) by the invention of
money as a exchange mechanism to replace barter. When I say
appreciation, I mean application of value to those economic systems
(forest cultures, nomadic farming etc., etc.) that do not involve money.
History is replete with example of cultures and lives destroyed by
devaluation of a way of life.

The most important impact of 'globalisation' is the replacement of all
economic systems by cash values. This is what is deepening the divide
between the 2 and the 4 billion. The digital divide is just another
facet of it.

I am not proposing here a solution to this, and certainly feel deeply
impotent by not having even the hint of an answer to offer at this
point, but I believe we owe it to ourselves to ponder upon it.
Certainly, bringing the 4 billion into the rat race by stripping them of
their wealth and earning capacity and starting them off as poor as
church mice is hardly encouraging. Does GKD want to be the place for a
discussion on this?

-- 
Vickram




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by USAID's dot-ORG Cooperative
Agreement with AED, in partnership with World Resources Institute's
Digital Dividend Project, and hosted by GKD.
http://www.dot-com-alliance.org and http://www.digitaldividend.org
provide 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
Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at:

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Can Technology and a Business Approach Make Globalization Work for the Poor?

[Vickram Crishna]

Not denying the examples Al Hammond has quoted, but just giving my own
(perhaps imperfect) viewpoint on how they work (comments interleaved
below):

On 10/27/04, Al Hammond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> But for example, ITC, an Indian company that has put Internet-connected
> computers in farmers' houses, situating these e-choupals so that each
> serves 600 or so farmers, and supplied daily market prices for crops,
> found it necessary to create trust and economic and social value in
> order for its business model to succeed. They are now serving 4 million
> farmers.

In siting the e-choupal local systems (the ones I have seen use shared
VSAT narrowband for linkage) the choice devolves to the richer farmers,
who already have considerable influence in their local domains. While in
theory such centers are accessible to all, please recognise the local
reality of caste and community that limit access for some - what
percentage depends very much on local equations.

> 1) Breaking local monopolies of traditional goods and services or
> the e-choupals that ITC has deployed, offering lower price inputs and
> higher prices for the farmer's grain than the local (monopoly) auction
> markets.

At this point in time, the monopoly of local auctions is being replaced
with the monopoly of a large company. I hope that the e-choupal paradigm
will be augmented by other market mechanisms, supplied by other players,
whether corporate or something else.

Let us look one step further - is this globalisation? ITC is a
subsidiary of BAT, the trans-national tobacco company, but fought a
bitter boardroom battle a few years back against its parent in an effort
to preserve some form of independence. No holds were barred, including
selective leaks of confidential information to get board officers jailed
(subsequently released) for alleged tax and foreign exchange offences.
The e-choupal initiative is reputedly the brainchild of the winner of
that fight.

The way that e-choupal works has not brought about globalisation, it
seeks to fix problems in traditional market flaws.

> Grameen Phone has close to 100,000 entrepreneurs providing village phone
> service.

True, but they had a hard time getting out of the towns and cities in
the beginning - I am talking about 1999, which is 5 years ago. Quite a
few of those 'entrepreneurs' at the time were allegedly city socialites
- but the bills got paid. This sort of information isn't usually found
on the corporate web-site or in news reports, possibly because it
remains hearsay, without a concerted effort to record information at the
time. Had Grameen Phone set itself up as the straightforward commercial
phone service it really was, it wouldn't have been allowed to even get
off the ground, given the monopolistic behaviour of the local government
telco.

I mention these two examples only to show that the realities of social
change are very very complex and shouldn't be simplified into
'corporate' vs 'other model' - such divides do not serve the purpose
that are sought by questions such as this topic line suggest.

-- 
Vickram




This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by USAID's dot-ORG Cooperative
Agreement with AED, in partnership with World Resources Institute's
Digital Dividend Project, and hosted by GKD.
http://www.dot-com-alliance.org and http://www.digitaldividend.org
provide 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
Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at:

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] What is the Future for Cyber-Security?

[Vickram Crishna]

On Friday, October 15, 2004, Jim Burnham wrote:

> While the Macintosh OS is not exactly a "new" technology (more a "niche"
> technology unfamiliar to the majority of computer users), I feel that
> the Mac OS is a valuable 'tool' for helping protect both businesses and
> individuals from the flood of cyber-attacks that they have to deal with
> every day. Perhaps the donors, rather than spending huge amounts of
> money on virus protection, training, and recovery of systems and
> networks once they are attacked, should help developing countries
> purchase Macintosh's. The initial up-front cost differential (Macs tend
> to be more expensive than PC's) will be more than made up for by the
> considerable savings in support.

Both MacOS and GNU/Linux, unfamiliar through lack of hands-on exposure
to the majority of computer users, are largely immune to cyber-attacks
(I use MacOS myself, and am attempting to get savvy enough to use
GNU/Linux) but this is (mostly) not because of superior technology.
Arguably, the donors should spend more money promoting GNU/Linux, which
is Open Source and mostly Free Software, thus reducing the cost of
acquisition tremendously. Support for most users is also free (note the
difference between capitalisations), and collaborative, which is good
for society in general.

Computers themselves are a niche technology, unfamiliar to and remote
from the lives of the vast majority of humans on this planet (I can't
;-) speculate about the humans who live off-planet). Yet their influence
is undeniable. It behooves us to seek ways to ensure that this impact is
mostly good, rather than mostly bad or mostly unknown, for that matter.

Creators of cyber-attacks follow the principle of low hanging fruit, and
therefore over 90 per cent of personal computer users who run MS Windows
are usually at risk from such attacks.

Cyber-attacks are a societal problem, and creating laws and battalions
of cyber-savvy law enforcement agencies is merely fire-fighting, not
getting to the root of the problem. The Net itself is global, while
different countries have different levels of openness and attitudes to
law making and enforcement. No single rule will fit all, I fear.
-- 

Vickram




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 Are the 'Right' Resources to Foster Professional Development?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 6/22/04, Gary Garriott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I was happy to see this post advocating a return to the concept of
> "development of basic supporting infrastructure.". My personal
> experience in rural development for more than a quarter century is that
> if people have the basic infrastructure and tools available, that their
> own innate creativity and entrepreneurial/survival skills will figure
> out how to use them. A few well-timed catalytic inputs by others (from
> the "north" or "south" or both) don't hurt either.

I have been forced by unreliable connectivity to stay out of adding my
two bits here for quite a while, through more than one challenging
question raised by the Moderator.

Within the general area of building a strong (and professional) base for
furthering societal growth, we (Radiophony) have researched and found
that the very cheapest form of ICT, for both content developers and
audience participants, is simple clear audio based FM radio. When
deployed for very small area chunks, FM radio costs less than one
hundred USD to set up and run for a while, not counting disbursement of
incentives to active local supporters. It is not difficult to see ways
in which local communities can value and support local radio, once it
begins. It is also not a difficult calculation to see that the little 
buck buys more big bangs.

Yet in many countries in South Asia, the overhang of colonial rule
(although long gone, more than fifty years back: a salutary thought in
itself) continues to view all use of radio as broadcasting. Most
officials appear to think that local FM is no different than the
propaganda that pours in from various "Free
'This-People's-and-That-People's' Radio" global sources on shortwave.
Actually, a lot of them don't even listen to radio anymore.

I echo Gary's feeling that a healthy dose of international support at
the level of mindset change will help. Our countries still, despite many
years of much healthier and approaching independent economies, cling to
notions that anything that comes from abroad (read: Western countries)
must be good. Hence McDonald's and Pepsi, Gucci and Armani.

I am aware that organisations such as UNDP and UNESCO have some
half-hearted attempts to promote independent radio in South Asia, yet
this has mostly been in the nature of either 'big' radio (attempting to
cover thousands of square kilometers at one go, in a false sense of
scaled economies), or endless conferences and workshops that have yet to
lead to policy change.

The dynamics of 'small' radio are totally different, far more involving
and far more likely to succeed as a vital component of local society.

I don't know what it is about the dynamics of the big organisations that
makes it difficult for them to champion small causes, but the lack of
such support is a factor in the slow penetration of positive change in
rural Asia.

-- 
Vickram




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] Community Learning by Radio and the Internet

[Vickram Crishna]

On 5/26/04, John Hibbs wrote:

> What would happen if micro radio would be so ubiquitous (and affordable)
> that children everywhere would have a frequent opportunity to be their
> own content developers? broadcasters? Wouldn't this activity compare to
> the piano recital? Christmas play? soccer game? How much value arises
> when the speaker knows that her grandmother is listening? or even the
> mayor? what "internal" value comes to those who have "been on the
> radio"?



What does it take to organise a reference demonstration of this simple
thesis?

Not much really - except that it would be quite illegal in most
countries, due to the same kind of thinking that has paralysed South
Africa (cf the article posted by bridges.org very recently on this list)
on the subject of WiFi and VoIP.


Here are the building blocks of micro-radio:


   * An inexpensive low power transmitter 
   * Antenna 
   * Microphone 
   * Recording device 
   * Editing device 
   * Playback device (may be the same as the recording device)


As I write this, I am listening to jazz on the radio, broadcast on the
Net by www.attentionspanradio.net and sent from my sound card to the
input jack of a tiny FM transmitter with a rudimentary antenna (their
d-i-y designs can be downloaded conveniently from
http:///www.radiophony.com, the Radiophony website), which cost a total
of IRs 200 to assemble, and the long-life rechargeable 12V battery which
powers it cost IRs 90. FYI, Rs 300 is approximately USD 6.5 these days.
The signal is just powerful enough to reach every room in the house.

For one account of what "internal value" really means, browse through
our website (Radiophony is promoted by Dr Arun Mehta and myself, both of
us are present on this list), where we describe the experience of
setting up India's first rural radio station (later shut down by some
bureaucrats). There are really no words to describe the thrill so
visible on the faces of villagers as they heard their voices on their
radio (in fact, they later named their station Mana Radio, which means
Our Radio in the local - Telugu - language). The station was powered by
a similar transmitter as the one I am listening through now, and with a
suitably placed antenna, every home (within half a kilometer from the
antenna mast) could tune in to their own village station.

But to return to the question raised by John Hibbs, what would it take
to 'scientifically' demonstrate the internal value? What would it take
to make radio ubiquitous and affordable?

By international agreement, the frequencies from 87.5 MHz to 108 MHz are
reserved for public broadcasting over FM. This fact has had a very
useful outcome, in that consumer FM radio receivers are extraordinarily
cheap in most parts of the world. This means that FM radio listening is
affordable, for the most part, but at the same time, the restricted band
of frequencies for the purpose has led to a commonly expressed fear
psychosis that the spectrum is a scarce commodity. Market forces usually
ensure that scarcity drives up prices, and in the case of FM broadcast
license fees or spectrum usage charges, this is true.

In the US, one of the world's heaviest users of spectrum in the FM band,
prices are sky-high, and the government has been stepping back from
protectionist measures that secured a place for public service radio.
Most public service radio frequencies are held by well-funded
organisations, while commercial radio has become massively dominated by
a very few media companies, and there does not seem to be much scope for
independent micro-radio to flourish, on the surface.

The reality is somewhat different.

Actually there are many 'pirate' stations that broadcast independent
content, and a groundswell movement that seeks to open the spectrum for
more micro-radio. The FCC has been forced to take note of the pioneering
study by the Prometheus Project (http://www.prometheusradio.org/) and a
hearing on Localism in Broadcasting will take place today (May 26) in
Rapid City, South Dakota. Sen John McCain is also expected to introduce
a legislation shortly to mandate bandwidth for low power radio.

Much more can be done to make the technology easily available.

The circuit on our website is not ideally temperature stable nor
filtered to a very high quality (US standards militate towards a
separation of 200 KHz between stations) - it was designed for low cost
and easy component availability.

What is needed is a handy circuit that can be easily tuned to lock onto
frequencies 200 KHz apart, encased in a simple, cheap and hardy box, and
an accompanying range of easy to build and tune antennae, so that
thousands of little stations can be set up within a few hundred meters
of each other, without the need for expensive one time use
instrumentation.

It won't take much to upgrade the technology of consumer level devices
to achieve the specifications outlined above - but someone must get down
and fine-tune them, and someone else must work out t

Re: [GKD] RFI: Impact of ICT on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises

[Vickram Crishna]

Fascinating.

At 12:26 PM + 12/02/2004, Pamela McLean wrote:
> - Early 2002 CAWD UK (me - Pamela McLean) came across Biodesign (Graham
> Knight) on the internet.  http://www.biodesign.org.uk

We (The microPower Initiative, in India) are also in touch with Graham
(through the Net) and have adopted some of his ideas and look forward to
working closely with BioDesign going ahead.

> - 2003 CAWD started to link with RUSEL (Victoria Adetona, also in
> Oke-Ogun, via OOCD) and Fantsuam Foundation (John Dada, also in rural
> Nigeria, but further north   via the
> Internet). RUSEL and Fantsuam Foundation (FF) both have experience of
> successful micro-credit schemes.

Fantsuam had contacted us (Radiophony) maybe a year ago for assistance
in starting rural radio station projects. If they are still interested,
so are we, and with TmPI's associated work with Graham, I think we can
now talk in terms of self-sufficiency for electricity too, essential for
the broadcasting side.

Basically, I am of the philosophy that development cannot take place
sustainably unless it involves and engages the people of the area where
development is sought. Certainly, such people are quite unlikely to
welcome ICT's unless they are sufficiently exposed to the advantages of
gathering and sharing information. The ethos of information is one of
the facets of human society that is lost in the economic divide, and
this is I think a major reason that there is often a gap between the
efforts people put in to help themselves, and that put in by groups of
external facilitators and contributors. This may also be a major reason
that ICT investments in themselves do not reliably deliver a measurable
ROI.

Radio has some advantages, as an introduction to pre-ICT.

Micro-radio (my own area of interest) is exceedingly cheap - so much so
that damaged transmission equipment (it is electronics, after all) can
be very easily replaced outright (see www.radiophony.com for a circuit
diagram that can be constructed for less than two dollars in India).

Micro-radio (a few hundred meters in radius) is so very local in nature,
it almost naturally generates simple methods for changing the
communication paradigm to many-to-many (from the one-to-many of
traditional broadcasting).

Micro-radio can be powered by very cheap solar photovoltaics, and
combined with rechargeable batteries, brings the unit cost of
electricity to extremely affordable levels, while making it universally
available (see the BioDesign website).

The audio medium is completely language independent, and is also (alone
among media technologies) literacy independent. This is true both for
audio programme producers as well as listeners.

Audio programmes can be easily designed and disseminated for local
production.

Production equipment can be sourced from just a handful of dollars
upward (as expertise and demand for complexity of programming
increases).

Simple audio programmes can be used to whet the appetite and the desire
for information. Self-help facilitators can pro-actively encourage
people to take charge of their own lives.

-- 
Vickram




***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-DOTCOM] The Role of the Private Sector

[Vickram Crishna]

On 11/25/2003, Global Knowledge Dev. Moderator wrote:

> Many GKD members have argued that the for-profit private sector must 
> play a key role in expanding access to underserved communities. The 
> notion is appealing.

At the outset, let me state that I operate as an entrepreneur, mainly
because the regulatory environment for public trusts in India is not
very good. However, the work we do and the technology solutions we
promote are almost completely focused on developmental issues, and I do
not see any conflict of interest here. Of course, we don't make a lot of
money either, and that is because we find ourselves shut out from
several funding opportunities. I also have found some NGOs reluctant to
deal with a for-profit, because it affects their own funding proposals.

> 1. What specific elements does a policy environment need in order to 
> encourage the private sector to expand access to poor, isolated, 
> underserved areas? Where do such policies exist?

The first part is a challenging question. To my mind, policies do not
drive access, demand does. Private companies will step in to supply
against demand if there is sufficient possibility of a profit in doing
so.

Having said that, policies can and do work to *prevent* such a supply
situation from being created, or even the demand situation. In India,
for instance, currently the use of VoIP with termination within the POTS
system (and that includes cellular and WiLL telephony) is banned, thus
depriving half a billion people from access to cheaper and possibly
affordable telephony. Without the experience of telephony, users are
deprived of the ability to demand, and providers to devise, more
imaginative uses for it (than POTS, that is).

> 2. What lessons have we learned about the risks and rewards of 
> creating public-private partnerships to expand access to the 
> underserved? Where have these lessons been applied, and where have 
> they worked?

Businesses are driven primarily by the profit motive. Unless there is a
significant change in market mechanisms (and this is one place - perhaps
the only place - that policies can make a difference) this situation
will continue.

To look at lessons in expanding access, I can suggest the experience of
'community' radio in Nepal, where several stations have been established
in difficult areas, where opposing political groups routinely employ
violence to further their cause.

In India, several rural development groups are attempting to deploy
better microbanking systems, using a hybrid combination of physical
access and electronic data capture. In the absence of higher
availability of electricity and low cost computers and networks
(connectivity) this must be the only practical solution.

> 3. What are specific, unexploited opportunities for public-private 
> partnerships to expand access to the underserved? Please provide 
> examples where these opportunities can be exploited effectively.

I have a little earlier suggested voice mail systems deployed over
smartphones using cellular and WiLL networks. To develop such a system
needs private-public partnering, even if the actual cost of software is
met through development in publicly owned facilities such as
universities. Actually, the cost of development is trivial, the
deployment needs a large investment, and I am not aware of any such
investment ever being made in the past by a public agency for promoting
access.

> 4. What concrete lessons have we learned about stimulating/supporting
> local businesses to extend access to the underserved? Please be
> specific. Where have these lessons been applied effectively?

The example of hybrid microbanking systems is a very good one, I 
believe. The reports I have read indicate that users consistently 
exhibit better banking behaviour, with higher rates of savings and 
lower defaults on loans, thus stimulating local economies. Both men 
and women appear to benefit, often the latter more.

> 5. Within underserved communities, women often face special 
> difficulties becoming ICT providers (e.g., lack of capital, 
> education, competing demands for time). Are there particular 
> approaches that can be used to support women entrepreneurs who want 
> to offer ICT access to underserved communities, beyond the 'Grameen 
> cell phone' model?

I have been told, verbally, that the private Reliance Infocomm WiLL
network in India has encouraged about 5,000 small entrepreneurs, of
which perhaps 20% are rural based, to use the phones as PCOs. No reports
have been published yet of this effort. However, where ordinary users
pay as little as Rs 500 (just over 9 euro) upfront for a phone with
connectivity, entrepreneurs under the scheme do not pay anything at all.
They also do not pay Reliance any commission, for billing of under Rs
250 per month. A call costs Rs 0.40 per minute (this was the cost, till
very recently, of a call within the Reliance network, anywhere in India,
but has probably gone up as a result of a regulatory change

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

[Vickram Crishna]

My two bits...

> 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?

Optical frequencies communication for exceptionally low power, very high
bandwidth, short distance communications (line-of-sight) will be very
likely to emerge as a new low cost option, in both desktop (laptop) and
handheld devices.  To deploy it, far more effort will be needed from
grassroots social assistance program workers.

Voice based messaging software programs will also appear on handhelds,
enabling the Grameen model to be deployed much more effectively in other
regions of the world, where cellular and cellular-like systems are being
and will be deployed over the next three years.

> 2. What's the most valuable area for technology development? Voice
> recognition? Cheap broadband delivery? Cheap hand-helds (under $50)?

The most critical area for technology development lies in the
digitisation and support of services in demand, not in hardware per se.
This is an exceedingly local activity, given that software development
by its very nature demands a huge level of interaction between
technologists and users.

In hardware, though, it is both cheaper broadband and handhelds that
need to emerge. Right now, in countries like India, the only really
cheap mobile handsets are obsolete ones, which do not support the kind
of operating systems that run such applications.

> 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?

We need to evolve better funding models, that are better equipped to
evaluate and deliver funds to grassroots projects that are more
appropriate to the communities in which they are to add value. Trying to
opine here in this group about specific projects we get to know about
somewhere else in the world is both frustrating and patronizing.

> 4. What levels of access should we be able to achieve by 2007 in each of
> the major under-served regions? Who (exactly) must do what (concretely)
> to attain them?

We need to get a foothold into these regions. And we need to have
funding in place that will support the growth of that foothold, driven
by local demand.

> 5. What funding models should we develop over the next 3 years? Projects
> with business plans that provide self-sustainability? Support from
> multilateral corporations? Venture capital funds for ICT and
> development?

In a nutshell, none of the above. But see *3.*, for the glaring
weaknesses in these models make it impossible to choose between them, or
even to want to make such a choice.
-- 
Vickram





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?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 11/12/2003, Cliff Missen wrote:

> You can still go into markets in much of the developing world and find
> someone whose business it is to write letters for others. (I like to
> harken back to old American Western movies where the farmer strides into
> the Western Union Telegraph station, hooks his thumbs under his overall
> straps, throws back his shoulders, and drawls, "I want to send me a
> message to Warshington...")
> 
> Today, villager's messages are being delivered on paper to a Internet
> Cafe and then transcribed into email for delivery worldwide by someone
> who holds an email account. There may someday be a SERVICE that enhances
> this informal relationship to the point where a single "griot" can
> manage email accounts for hundreds of clients through a simple handheld
> device. It'll take a little tweaking of the current email and client
> software, but it's very possible.

Exactly. In fact, I am currently looking for a source of funding to
develop (with an expert technology source right here in India) precisely
such an application - voice mail to anyone anywhere, delivered over a
modern handheld based telecom system, using the Net's proven store and
forward paradigm. CDMA technology, recently deployed with an aggressive
and innovative approach, has begun to push the limits of deployment
already, with far many more connections in select rural areas in the
past few months than traditional telephony could achieve in fifty years.

My thesis for voice mail is something I emphasise again and again, the
situation on the ground is that peoples of old nations have hundreds of
living languages, only some of which are supported meaningfully by
written scripts. New technology or expanding the use of known technology
makes sense when such realities are incorporated or allowed for. I think
this applies to much of Africa and Asia. The idea of someone writing a
message for someone else is seductive (we have Rudyard Kipling's 'Kim'
as a classic literary example: as a young schoolboy, Kim uses an
itinerant roadside letter writer to send his postcards, and, BTW, you
will find such letter-writers sitting outside post offices everywhere in
India even today). We need to look beyond this system.

Thank you for the word 'griot', a fascinating concept, and very much
alive here in India, yet amazingly easy to diminish or destroy
unthinkingly.


On 11/13/2003, Don Richardson wrote:

> The telephone is the most basic unit of telecommunications service. The
> policies and programs implemented in support of rural telephony services
> are a critical part of the supporting environment for other rural ICT
> initiatives. In most cases rural connectivity can best piggyback on or
> leverage infrastructure that is primarily intended to support rural
> telephony. Among rural populations, voice communications will usually be
> the most immediately useful and easily accessible service (application).
> 
> In addition, a great deal of evidence shows that telephone services are
> the primary source of revenue for rural telecommunication services.
> Without that revenue, operators would have no justification to extend
> their networks to rural areas, and these networks are critical for
> supporting other applications like the Internet. For example, many
> research studies on telecentres and phone shops that provide both
> Internet and telephone services conclude that voice communications (i.e.
> phone calls) provide the overwhelming majority of telecentre revenues.
> For these reasons, it is important to examine in detail the rural
> telephony policy and programmatic issues that form part of the operating
> environment for broader rural ICT/connectivity initiatives. Basic
> telephone services enable agricultural extension stakeholders to
> creatively integrate a wide variety of other ICT applications that would
> not otherwise be possible.

In India, the 'partyline' system, where one telephone operator handles
outward dialing for many users, thus saving on installation costs and
allowing many users to share a single telephone line has always been
'legal', yet the rules were framed in such a way as to prevent its
implementation.

The reason is political: most likely to do with the inability of power
groups (even, and perhaps mainly, minor bureaucrats) to do anything that
brings about sweeping change. Formal submissions to regulatory bodies
over the past five or six years pulled out fiscal data to show how
impossible it is to deploy telecom in the rural areas of the country,
yet we have proven evidence today to show that the data was muddily
compiled. Towards the end of last year, a private audience with the
minister in charge gave him enough gumption to order the private
deployment of partyline telephone networks (but only for the rural poor,
not the urban poor). Although the largest telco here is still the
government owned provider, it will not lift a finger to extend its
networks with such services. The audience was not mine, I am 

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

[Vickram Crishna]

At 10:27 + on 11/12/2003, Peter Burgess wrote:

> Whatever happened to the idea of pen and paper, and typewriter
> (manual)?

Sometimes one gets that aha! experience, given an unexpected piece of
information, or a new look at something that was there all along.

At the AMARC conference in Kathmandu earlier this year, the delegate
from Papua New Guinea mentioned how one of the biggest problems in his
region is the unavailability of affordable dry cells (forget
rechargeables!). This limits the usefulness of the radio experience for
listeners, and also for program producers, who need to be extremely
careful in field recording projects. This was a concept quite alien to
me, from India, where I have a choice of at least four if not five
brands of cells, in different parts of the country. Aha!

On communication, it is seductive to think of simple communications as
writing with pen and paper, but in many rural areas of developing
countries, even *paper* is a problem, never mind *literacy*, a *unified
language* base and the commerce in consumables such as pencils and ink.
This is the major reason to favour voice communications - at least the
speaker and listener are very often interested in using the same
language, which may or may not even support or be associated with  a
written script.

Telecommunications very quickly morphed into voice from script (Morse
and other codes based), in the initial life cycle, and voice grew much
faster than script. This happened in areas of countries that today would
be considered developing or even severely underdeveloped.

Fortunately, from the technology point of view, voice is now a subset of
the data telecommunications experience, thus enabling both interpersonal
communication and e-commerce, e-governance and e-societal development,
using the same investments in technology and its deployment. But voice
must and probably shall rule supreme from the point of view of user
experience, and it makes a lot of sense to give it its due prominence,
while prioritising.

-- 
Vickram





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] Misunderstanding Broadband

[Vickram Crishna]

Al Hammond wrote:

> WiFi networks already cover ranges of 100 miles or more,
> with repeaters and tuned anntennae--in Laos, in California, in India,
> and in many other places.

If it is happening in India, sadly, it is illegal. We are only permitted
to operate WiFi indoors. However, the definition of *indoors* has been
extended to include the physical area of a campus. 100 miles and similar
extended areas, while highly desirable, seems hard to believe.

--
Vickram





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] RFI: Pico Hydro Power and ICT Deployments

[Vickram Crishna]

At 3:31 PM +0530 13/10/2003, Venkatesh (Venky) Hariharan wrote:

> Has anyone on this list come across a deployment of ICT specifically
> meant for powering computers in rural areas? I would be interested in
> hearing about this.

Venky - you have separately been in direct contact with Udit about using
relatively inexpensive solar power panels to recharge batteries that
will be part of a direct/alternating current supply for a computer.

This can be made to work in a real world scenario by distributing the
computers locally within a village (and not putting them in 'special'
cybercenters), connecting them using Wi-Fi locally. This means that the
network has to be grown outwards from one or more points within the
village, since Wi-Fi has an inbuilt signal strength issue.

Each node is self contained, and the responsibility for keeping them
powered up then becomes the users'. Panels for single computers are not
prohibitively expensive (TCO), unlike installations for complete
cybercenters, which then naturally become part of a bureaucracy.

It takes a bit more thought and effort to get such a network started,
but I think in terms of sustainability it is certainly a more attractive
proposition. In fact, the process of installation can also trigger off a
fresh growth industry - installation services.

-- 
Vickram



***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

[Vickram Crishna]

At 9:46 PM +0100 25/06/2003, Tony Roberts wrote:

> What we need to do is make an appropriate distinction between dumping
> and providing quality, fully refurbished, Pentium PCs into contexts
> where the appropriate capacity is already in place to make productive
> use of them. This means that secure and adapted premises, experienced
> staff and access to free or affordable technical support is in place.

A couple of posts here also suggesting that one via media is to do a
workaround with the computers sent to small businesses who will then
integrate their usage locally.

Donee schools can also do this, farming out the computers to local
businesses with the proviso that the machines be available to the school
during specified times (school hours, study periods) and be used for
whatever else (cybercafes, printshops, entertainment centers) the rest
of the time.

The problem with this is the fact that the donee schools are often run
by absentee trustees, who do not care often enough to see the big
picture. Whether they are private or public (ie commercial or government
run schools) finally the responsibility for imparting education must be
that of the local administration (teachers and principal).

Also not much point if the donor organisations make (well-meaning, but
well!) demands about end-usage that prevent the computers from being
used at all!
-- 
Vickram



***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 Graph on ICTs in Africa

[Vickram Crishna]

This is just one more example of how things are structured AGAINST
development (by which I mean equitable distribution of wealth and
opportunity)... and anyone who raises a voice is labelled anarchic or
some other convenient socio-eco-political pejorative.

This graph refers to status quo in interconnectivity, whereas I am
relating here an episode in the fight for wireless spectrum in
broadcasting. However, I think that both broadcasting and
interconnectivity could do with freeing up of spectrum. This should
particularly be encouraged in developing countries, because the
situation regarding frequency usage is so different from the paradigm of
the North.

Last week at the AMARC conference I tried to have the World Association
of Community Radio Broadcasters endorse an appeal for freeing up
frequencies from excessive regulation, that certain low cost
technologies, such as low power FM, can use without creating global
problems in interference.

The main objections?

One: that freeing frequencies from regulation (that's not what I said, I
asked for local governance in such matters) is anarchic (sic).

Two: that the current governance of frequency usage is an international
agreement going back years, it works, and we should not propose any
change that 'they' will defeat as 'being anarchic' (which seems to say
that if it ain't broke, don't fix it - but it is broke. Many countries
have citizenry who are denied the use of this incredibly low cost medium
of local communication and information dissemination, one that even
illiterate people can manage with minimal (or no) assistance).

The final solution?

The Kathmandu Declaration, February 2003, now includes a clause that
reads: "We call for regulation of frequency spectra for community radio
such that it favors the development of this medium for the use of local
communities."

It really in my opinion does not say much more than the status quo. But
still, it can be used as one more flag to wave when local government
policies are being discussed, and hopefully totally repressive
governments will find it easier to accept than asking for radical change
in the right of their citizens to information.

To further amplify the reasoning behind each phrase:

We call for the... : AMARC is a recognised international body supporting
the use of community radio in the development of civil societies.

..regulation of frequency spectra... : current status is to manage
frequencies at the central level. Except for advanced countries like
Germany, this is just about universal. There is no justification for
this situation in the use of public FM bands, where signal propagation
phenomenon is completely local.

..the development of this medium... : current broadcast technology
(pretty well 50 years old) is almost totally North centric and not
suited for many parts of the third world.

.. for the use of local communities. : This is to avoid the tendency to
hand out this frequency band excessively to commercial, religious or
political pressure interests.

The AMARC Kathmandu Declaration goes on to say (rather verbosely, I
fear), with regard to WSIS:

"We therefore urge all the participants in the WSIS process,
particularly the government of Tunisia which will host the second
assembly, to recognize and support the role of community media in
providing spaces for people's voices to be heard in the formulation and
implementation of national, regional and international policies on
information and communication technologies and in the construction of an
information society which is globalized for the many rather than the
few. Further, this approach must extend beyond the WSIS into the
foreseeable future."


At 3:06 PM +0100 05/03/2003, Richard Gerster wrote:

> We invite you to have a look at our new graph at the homepage
>  on our latest
> graph: The Intercontinental Detours of Internal African Phone Calls
>
> Do you know? African telephone companies annually pay USD400 million to
> European and North American providers for internal African connections.
> We examine a phone call from Benin (Porto Novo) to Nigeria (Lagos) and
> compare it to an international phone call of similar distance from
> Switzerland (Geneva) to France (Lyon). Our graph is a contribution in
> view of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva,
> December 10 - 12, 2003, and in Tunis in 2005. The graph can be
> downloaded in English and German.


-- 
Vickram




***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] World Computer Exchange Article

[Vickram Crishna]

At 1:11 PM + 13/02/2003, Pamela McLean wrote:

> We are exploring possibilities for equipping a community centre, such as
> getting computers through World Computer Exchange (WCE). Any advice or
> comments would be welcome.
> 
> 
> In the long term we recognise that there are good reasons for using Open
> Source, but we have no relevant experience. Obviously if we do get
> computers we will need technical support, and as available expertise
> favours Microsoft, we are likely to start with Microsoft.

I presume you mean the expertise available at hand. If Net based support
is an option, I suspect you will find that it is far better for Linux.
MS is always a backup option available to you since the computers you
get will probably have that preloaded.

> Our teachers' initial interest is not in teaching computer classes, but
> in the potential of ICTs for communicating and gaining information. For
> instance, Adebite Johnson wants to use the potential of computers to
> support his subject work. His most urgent thought is that somehow it
> might help him to improve the standards of the geography department,
> which is terribly under-resourced. He also wants to exchange information
> with other schools.

I have understood your concern about poor electricity and no telephones.
But if the latter is the reality, you will find exchange of information
a serious issue. One solution to this is Wi-Fi, an inexpensive
technology for broadband wireless connectivity between computers. Its
major limitation is distance, as effective bandwidth drops off seriously
fast over 20 km. Even to get this distance you need special antenna -
the technology was originally developed as an alternative to wired
Ethernet. Perhaps you should also look at downloading data on a regular
basis using Worldspace's Africa satellite. This may be the cheapest and
easiest way to regularly update your computers with information on
various subjects.

> Adebite Johnson can also access information on CD-ROMS, to
> share with his students, thanks to the OOCD2000+ field officer, David
> Mutua, and his laptop, Adebite Johnson will also be contacting groups
> such as SchoolNet and Teachers Without Borders through David, who
> currently travels a half day journey to Ibadan to do overnight
> web-browsing and email sessions on behalf of the project. (see thread on
> email for rural Africa)
>
>
>
>>  I think that Frederick's various
>>  concerns are perfectly valid (snip) he raises:
>>  > What is the impact on recipients (snip) Are such
>>  > gift-horses appreciated well, or simply abused and misused by
>>  > recipients, who feel they've got the PCs in an easy way anyway?
>
> Even free computers would not be seen as 'easy'. OOCD2000+ has worked
> hard to get this far, laying all the foundations of the project, which
> ensure that it has excellent social capital.

Without social capital, as you say, you would not have got this far.
What lies next is harder: for you to sustain it and support it with
infrastructure so that the project does not become an insufferable
burden to the core team.

> We do have concerns about the level of
> technical support that may be needed, software costs, and the electrical
> power that will be needed to keep them running, but we will do our best
> to overcome these difficulties, just as we have done our best to
> overcome our previous and present difficulties.

Incidentally, I saw a mail just a couple of days back about IBM Linux
boxes costing only $199 retail now in the US. They need keyboard, mouse
and monitor to be full-fledged computers, which WCE can probably help
you with easily.

Are you looking at solar power or micro-hydel for the electricity
problems? We have some expertise with these technologies here in India,
and I can help put you in touch with developers. The best thing about
twinning your computer project with this technology is the fact that it
will be of help in so many more developmental areas for the people in
the immediate region.
-- 
Vickram




***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] Radio and ICT

[Vickram Crishna]

At 3:53 PM + 08/07/2002, Lynette Obare wrote:

> We need to be very cautious about how they get to be used in community
> and ensure that it does not marginalise women or those with low income.
> We also needs to consider women's gender daily calender and when to air
> certain programmes so that it coincides with the time they are at home.
> Without taking some of these intricate issues into consideration we risk
> losing an important target audience.
>
> Having been part of the Kenya Community Media Network that promotes
> different approaches in community empowerment, use of community radio as
> a tool has been hindered by licensing of airwaves. It also involves a
> lot of resources. We were also looking into the use of manual radios but
> we realised that these also required resources.

We have been trying to excite interest in very low-cost rural oriented
community radio initiatives. We have found that it is possible to get
fairly good reach in a small region (dia less than 1/2 km, about the
size of a typical village) using extremely low powered radio frequency
modulators feeding ordinary paired wire. This leaks enough power to
ensure that receivers in the vicinity of the wire can get decent
reception. Since leakage of power is intrinsic to any electric wire, we
maintain no explicit licensing is needed. In fact, if there is already a
local cable TV network in place, this can be used to carry the signals.

We use very low cost digital recording equipment to build the production
studio, thus the total cost of operation is also low. The remaining cost
is in the training of the people who will produce audio content on a
regular basis. We have successfully set up this kind of community radio
in India.

Please contact me off-list if you would like to have more details.
-- 
Vickram Crishna
ceo
Net Radiophony India Pvt Ltd
Wireless Freedom!
www.radiophony.com
"how can I be of service to you without diminishing your degrees of
freedom?" -- R. Buckminster Fuller




***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] Literacy -- A Forgotten ICT?

[Vickram Crishna]

Richard Labelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I guess that this all depends on what is meant by literacy. Not being
> able to read and write does not preclude being able to develop, test and
> use technology and reading and writing may not be necessary to use some
> of the newer ICTs. People can afterall communicate orally and the use
> visual cues and messages, including drawings, to communicate.

Living and working in India makes one peculiarly alive to the need for
communications that are not language sensitive, or transcend language
sensitivity.

We (at radiophony... http://www.radiophony,com) have been struggling
with the creation of a software that will enable people with severe
physical difficulties to gain computer literacy, so that computers can
become very versatile AAC (assisted and augmented communication)
devices. In the process I do not think a single one of us (an extended
workgroup based in Yahoo Groups) has not realised with some force that
there really isn't much difference between helping those who cannot move
much and those who cannot use English. Once you have eliminated the
keyboard and mouse as a necessary adjunct of computing (interacting with
the computer), it is not a big step to 'junk' English either (in order
to get one's work done).

Much of the problems with traditional interfaces has to do with the need
to punch particular keys. This goes away when you have only a limited
number (as low as one) click devices.

Please contact me offlist if you would like to discuss this further. I
somehow think (empirically and intuitively) that this will have a huge
impact on our understanding of communications, going forward.
-- 

Vickram




***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:

Re: [GKD] Strengthening Knowledge & Information Systems of the Urban Poor

[Vickram Crishna]

At 9:38 AM -0400 22/04/2002, Otto Ruskulis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Policy implications for development agencies to make their knowledge and
> information more accessible to the urban poor, and to strengthen the
> latter's knowledge and information base include:

We are getting a very encouraging response from state governments in
India and hope to extend this internationally, to the installation of
very low cost audio (FM) stations in village and similar non-urban
communities (very small conglomerations).


> * Treat poor people as equals, value their knowledge and create two-way
> communication.

The solution becomes much more empowering when two way radio
communication is added to the technology mix, since people can respond
directly to the programme producers, even though some argue that since
the producers are in the village this is not necessary (we disagree,
needless to say, and a simple glance at the dynamics of village
topography will show that there almost always exist pockets of
have-nots, whose lot is even lower than the general level of the village
unit itself). This does not add significantly to cost of the hardware
solution, but countering this adds tremendously to the social value of
the new medium. Actually, the two way devices are potentially extensions
of the local telecom solution, but interfacing to the legacy system is a
challenge. On the other hand, interfacing to the Net is not such a major
difficulty, and several audio based IP traffic handling solutions
already exist both as free and paid services.

> * Reduce exclusion, by targeting groups of poor people that have the
> greatest problems, and by reducing external factors that increase
> exclusion.

Low cost FM receivers and two way devices are the cheapest form of
modern communication. Distributed to all, together with innovative
solutions to the problem of energy costs (that impact the poorest the
maximum), entry barriers to information access are lowered
significantly.

> * Support communities to build knowledge and information capital, by
> taking stock of existing resources and addressing gaps, building the
 >capacity of key informants, empowering communities, and stimulating
 >meeting places, resourcecentres and exchange visits.

Nearby villages can exchange audio content easily by the use of
removable media, and once they are connected to the Net, distance is no
longer the significant barrier.

> * Improve the attitudes and impact of information suppliers, by
> sensitising and supporting public authorities, producing appropriate
> information resources and building capacity, documenting and sharing
> good communication practice, and using a range of media including the
> traditional alongside themodern.

By introducing content production right at the village level, the
information equation shifts from push to pull, in that the consumers and
producers of information are both far better placed to create a demand
for information.

> * Invest in developing sustainable ICTs for the urban poor.

The same technology is applicable.

> * Develop more appropriate impact indicators, as well as more knowledge
> ofthe cost-effectiveness of alternative communication methods, and
> disseminate theresults of urban-based work more widely."

I think this is the most difficult and challenging part of the total
intervention, as no such intervention occurs in isolation, and indeed a
characteristic of an LDC is the extent of sweeping change that is
happening.


-- 
Vickram





***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:

Re: [GKD] India Adopts Universal Access

[Vickram Crishna]

At 2:21 PM + 28/01/2002, Daniel Taghioff wrote:

> Has anyone looked into what types of projects the Simputer might be
> compatible with? Has anyone investigated the outreach dimensions of
> Simputer adoption, and who would be willing to back this? Does anyone
> have any information about simputer and micro-credit tie ups? And
> finally, does anyone have case studies of how Simputers might have been
> used to the detriment of less advantaged groups, since Perry is
> justified when calling for a balanced picture.

The Simputer is in its infancy. Yes, outreach projects such as
microbanking, where Palm Pilots/other PDAs are already being
implemented, are at the planning stage for the Simputer. One significant
difference that the Simputer brings to the table is its built-in smart
card reader. Another project of significant potential impact is the
Worldspace satellite radio extender: satellite receivers are beyond the
reach of many rural poor (because of a) cost and b) uncertain electric
supply), so the battery run Simputer will be used to record specially
created audio programming, and it can then be physically carried to
remote locations for playback. This project has already been announced,
the pilot is for 100 Simputers, and is backed by a global outreach
trust.

I am not sure how one can have real-life case studies for the Simputer
at this point. Are you asking, rather, about possible detrimental
scenarios? As rightly pointed out, powerbrokers right down to the
village level can abuse modern technology (things like personal
smartcards). Already, in rural India, the abuse of postal money orders,
a much lower order of technology, is rampant, but this is legendary and
anecdotal. I have not heard of rigorous studies of this issue.

The right source for more information on projects that have been
suggested for the Simputer is the Simputer group themselves. If people
from that group are not already on this list, I can ask for a roundup of
projects and pass them on here.

-- 
Vickram




***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership***
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] Acknowledging the Digital Divide

[Vickram Crishna]

At 5:48 AM -0500 24/01/2002, Margaret Grieco wrote:

> Views reflect experiences: knowledge is developed and retained on the
> basis of its relevance to our condition.
> 
> Perry Morrison's view on the patterning of flows along the
> information... flows. I myself am very concerned to ensure that Africa
> is not simply a recipient of the messages of others but gains the space
> and resources to transmit her own experience and interact with the
> experience of other places. The potential of the new technologies to
> enable the direct

At 2:12 PM -0800 24/01/2002, Alan Levy wrote:

> As noted in another email I sent, a network is ubiquitous in nature,
> making a connection only an ID. As explained in my book, a low-cost
> access device required to work both with user and access device
> authentication and verification (an ID for both) eliminates potential
> for theft when borrowed. And a medium bandwidth network provides a very
> low cost applications platform.

Both Margaret and Alan make extremely thoughtful points here. However,
when advocating networks that willy-nilly need to operate better and
faster on the edge, don't forget that a reality in marginal and
disadvantaged societies is the potential for abuse (of privacy, of
control) by powerful interests. The expression of such potential is
usually couched in seductive terms such as 'protection' of marginal
elements (even from device theft, as Alan here rightly points out one
possible danger to be avoided) and so on, but what it quickly boils down
to in practice is further oppression and suppression of an individual's
innate right to communicate freely.

This is how power managers continue to exercise control while new
technology is introduced, and advocates need to be constantly aware of
the downside risks, if the purpose of promoting new technology is to
result in net uplift, both in economic and social terms.

Anyway, given the marginal economies within which such networks are
sought to be proliferated (and I also subscribe to the view that it is
the network that will leverage local society and economy, so don't wait
till the local social group can 'afford' it), edge devices need to be
socially owned, one device for many. I think that it will be some time
before we see any sensible devices costing as little as a simple radio,
and till then, one device for many is the answer. To address issues of
privacy, something like smart cards and user passwords may seem
necessary, but I genuinely dislike its possible fallout. I think this
point needs addressing.

-- 
Vickram




***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership***
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: