Hacker ethic says "everyone should get access to computers". OK. But how do we prioritise groups in the gradual increase of access?
-
-
Replying to @adam_chal
Increasing computer access in Africa is completely different to increased access for rural American veterans. Needs different infrastructure
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @adam_chal
"everyone deserves X" always requires a follow-up conversation about which groups without X get it first.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @adam_chal
This and more thoughts inspired by
@aparrish 's awesome talk Programming Is Forgetting http://opentranscripts.org/transcript/programming-forgetting-new-hacker-ethic/ … - highly recommend.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @adam_chal @aparrish
The fuck up of Facebook's free internet program in India shows what happens when you don't have these conversations.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @adam_chal
Also. Access to computers vs Quality of Life is NOT a straight upwards line. Having access to internet without antivirus could be a net losspic.twitter.com/sDV6kXQWMr
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @adam_chal
Also I'm gonna guess there's some huge interaction between getting internet access and getting access to other important things (i.e. water)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @adam_chal
It's fine for us to say "you should have internet access" but is that honestly a priority for all of the people we are talking to?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Agreed, but I think that's a different issue. People assume increase in tech access is automatically good. Not universally true.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Fair enough. I'm just always wary of saying "people need this thing" because we don't have a good track record of getting it right
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.