interesting-people message

Subject: IP: second of two replies to an original note They don't need broadband -- let them eat ----

From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
To: ip <ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2002 11:29:08 -0500

Title: approve:ggmu second of two replies to an original note They don't need broadband -- let them eat ----

Again read from end by message

------ Forwarded Message
From: Jock Gill <jock@jockgill.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 18:40:25 -0500
To: David Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: Re: also comment

Dave,

I beg to differ with the reader from Canada.

True, electricity is either on or off. However, the difference between broadband access to information - especially media rich information - is non liner with respect to text only over copper phone lines - or even cell phone access at 19.2

The important difference or ease of access, quality and quantity of media choices is also critical. I very much doubt our good friend from north of the border would settle for being personally limited to what he can research over telephone line when all of his competitors are researching all media types at broadband speeds. Ask him to risk his professional career for several years by limiting himself to working only on a slow modem. I doubt very much he will take the bet.

As I wrote earlier:

If, for example, we take a class trip to the swamps to study swamp water, we want all students to have at least access to the same quality microscopes. Not some limited to broken coke bottles and others to simple magnifying glasses and still others to the finest microscopes.

A good example is multidimensional data fusion in 3D as demonstrated by Creve Maples of Sandia Labs some years ago. People with Creve's system have a distinct "unfair" competitive advantage in finding solutions to a number of critical and complex information processing problems with direct engineering applications in both civilian and military areas..

Is the good professor arguing that some should be limited in ways they can participate and compete? Is he arguing that we should all be content with text based web pages and text email? Would he be?

Regards,

Jock

At 01:54 PM 3/2/2002 -0500, you wrote:

Delivered-To: dfarber@fast.net
Delivered-To: CLUSTERHOST newmx2.fast.net dfarber@fast.net
From: "Kedrosky, Paul" <paul.kedrosky@commerce.ubc.ca>
To: "'farber@cis.upenn.edu'" <farber@cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: Errant syllogism (was RE: utterly misses the point more onThey d
on't needbroadband -- let them eat ----)
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:01:11 -0800
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)

Dave --

Jock Gill is promoting an errant syllogism. Ubiquitous broadband is not
analogous to rural electrification, however seductive the analogy might be.

He argues that in an "information driven society, equitable access
information, power, is part of the level playing field that our Democracy is
supposed to be about". Fair enough, as far as it goes -- but that's not very
far.

Because information access is a continuum -- you can have varying amounts of
information, even varying quality -- while rural electrification was binary
-- either you had electricity on your farm, or you didn't. In the former
case it arguably made sense for the state to intervene given how slow the
private sector was in providing an essential good -- electricity.

But you can't reasonably make the same argument for broadband or the digital
divide. As Hiawatha Bray points out, broadband is no panacea, and many
choose willingly not to have it. And anyone who wants Internet access and
has a phone can get on today. Needless to say, none of this takes anything
away from the availability of all sorts of other information sources, from
newspapers to network news.

The rural electrification syllogism is a canard.

-------------------------
Paul Kedrosky
Faculty of Commerce
University of British Columbia
paul.kedrosky@ubc.ca

Jock Gill < jock@jockgill.com >
<www.jockgill.com <http://www.jockgill.com/> >
Interactive Digital Studies

------ End of Forwarded Message