Newsgroups: workspace.g-we_want_bandwidth,
workspace.we_want_bandwidth


previous    top    workgroup    thread    next


Subject: John Horvath 1th reaction
From: marleen <marleen@waag.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 20:17:32 METDST

* * * * *

Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 22:10:28 +0200 From: John Horvath <jhorv@helka>
To: bandwidth@waag.org / Subject: something for you

The problem of bandwidth is merely a microcosm of our inability, or
reluctance, to consolidate technological change. This is not only in
terms of computer technology, but overall technological process,
although computer technology makes this problem more apparent. To put
it idiomatically (not to be confused with idiotically): we are biting
off more than we can chew.

By refusing to consolidate technological change and progress, human
civilization becomes further segregated, not only between cultures and
societies, but within particular societies as well. To put it more
bluntly: the desire and perceived need for bandwidth widens the rift
between the haves and have-nots.

In Central and Eastern Europe this problem can be seen quite clearly.
The region is already divided along rural and urban lines, much more
so than western Europe and North America (Mexico excluded). In many
areas there are towns and villages that still do not have paved roads,
running water, or even sewage systems. Even in Budapest, which is
trying to consider itself a modern, western metropolis, there are
isolated areas where these services are lacking. Subsequently, it
should come as no surprise that telecommunication infrastructure (and
a digital one at that) is sorely lacking.

Given the poor and underdeveloped state of digital infrastructure in
Central and Eastern Europe, such statements as "we want more
bandwidth" are clearly elitist. Firstly, many people are happy to get
any reliable bandwidth at all, even if it is at flintstone speed.
Secondly, it downplays any attempts at universal access. A prime
example is the ELLA system in Hungary developed by the NIIF (the
National Infrastructure Development Program, formerly the IIF).

ELLA is a home-grown central mailbox system and was the very first
e-mail system Hungarians had access to. While many in the west were
still in the dark about simple e-mail, educational, academic, and
cultural institutions in Hungary were already connected. It used to be
a closed system in where messages to the Internet was possible via a
gateway. This system has since been put on the HELKA server of the
NIIF in an effort to modernize the system.

Naturally, with the popularization of the web and GUI-based
applications, systems like ELLA have been shoved aside. Now if you
mention ELLA to anyone in the Internet community in Hungary, the most
common reaction you will get is "ugh!". The connotation behind such a
remark is that it is quite a primitive system.

This may be so when compared with the applications of today. However,
if our purpose is universal access and a "level playing field", such
views that look down on more "simple" applications are just plain
condescending. Since ELLA is sponsored by the NIIF, most higher
educational institutions and libraries within Hungary have ELLA,
making it a very accessible and affordable (i.e. free) connection for
students and teachers. Not only are most public institutions connected
to ELLA, t also caters to the needs of individual users. There is the
possibility of obtaining an off-line reader called BUTELLA which
enables users to quickly send and retrieve mail from their account,
much like the "toss and grab" process of many BBS networks. Moreover,
there is a special number that can be called from any point in the
country for the price of a local call, making ELLA a very affordable
e-mail alternative for individuals in rural, isolated areas.

The ELLA system is not unique; many such initiatives exist throughout
the region. However, with strained government budgets and an overly
entrepreneurial spirit toward development, such initiatives are seen
as a waste of public money, which is better spent toward private
economic concerns (better known by the term "privatization"). Hence,
they are being cut back, "privatized" (i.e., what was once free now
has to be paid for), or even abandoned.

The perceived need for greater bandwidth merely exacerbates this
already precarious situation. Information on the Internet is becoming
increasingly bandwidth-intensive and packaged in such a way that it
can't be accessed with less band-intensive applications. A case in
point is with lynx; most web sites do not accommodate for alternative
browsers or readers, other than Netscape and Internet Explorer
versions 3.0, thereby making any information available difficult to
interpret and even incomprehensible for lynx users -- or restricting
access to such sites altogether.

Consequently, research and development in using alternative
communication technologies, such as HAM radio, are not even considered
since the bandwidth supported by such technologies are considered
negligible. Furthermore, software that can be used to run on old,
antiquated hardware (such as basic KERMIT, which runs well with an 8
Mhz 286 and only 640K RAM), is no longer developed or even supported,
if even used at all.

In trying to overcome social and rural seclusion and introduce the
concept of interactive communication to a broader base of a given
population, such technologies and systems can be instrumental in
achieving goals toward universal service by providing a basic level of
access. Many in rural areas of Central and Eastern Europe are
isolated not only physically from the more urbanite happenings of the
"global economy" and the online world, but are also conceptually
unable to fully grasp its implications. Although much is printed about
the Internet in newspapers, along with radio and television shows and
reports about "cyberspace", it is hard for people to fully understand
the extent of what is going on when they can't properly conceptualize
the information that is being thrown at them. The only way in which
they can begin to have an idea about what is going on is if they can
see it for themselves, that is, in terms of actually using the
technology.

What is ironic in all of this is that a lot of the "old" technology,
in terms of slower hardware (286 PCs, 2400 bps modems, etc), are being
thrown out, recycled, or are just sitting idle and gathering dust,
when they can be used to help bridge the gap between those who know
and those who don't. The idea that slow connection speeds is nearly
useless in the perceived need for greater bandwidth, merely justifies
the trashing of "old" technology. In many ways, this is a reflection
of basic, capitalist behaviour; although there are people in need,
they are kept in a perpetual state of want. For example, in terms of
food, western countries destroy much of their surplus in order to
encourage a continual cycle of production-consumption (also referred
to as the process of "supply and demand") as well as to keep market
prices high in order for particular products to remain "competitive"
(Canada has done so in the past with eggs and wheat, Germany with
apples). In turn, redistribution to the poor and needy is restricted.
Furthermore, public "health" concerns are used as a guise by
authorities to restrict any form of redistribution efforts, as in the
case of "Food Not Bombs", an organization which is continually
harassed by local authorities.

Unfortunately, in the computer world the issue of bandwidth plays a
similar role. People are being kept offline until they can not only
afford access, but also the ability to run applications that use a lot
of bandwidth. Thus, by demanding more bandwidth rather than
concentrating on, and supporting the development of, less
band-intensive web sites and applications, the dichotomy between "us
and them" will linger on while the chasm separating the rich and poor
widens, perpetuating the social, economic, and political injustices
that such segregation breeds.


John Horvath
Budapest, Hungary