Hi all, apologies for jumping in late. The declaration reads very well,
congratulations to everyone for the work!
I have one major concern, though:
Concern: The beginning of the document is not entirely true: "Over three
billion people do not have access to communication infrastructure". While
there is common agreement that there are only 3 billion people connected to
(using) the Internet, that does not mean that they do not have access to
communications. For instance, the ITU shows that coverage for both GSM and
3G networks is way beyond that number [1]. Other reasons may explain this
gap, affordability, lack of relevant content, confidence/skills, etc, but
not lack of access. Thus, we may need to rephrase that sentence if we don't
want people to criticize the Declaration right from the start. I suggest:
"Over four billion people remain unconnected to the Internet, including
around a billion who do not have access to basic telephony services".
I hope this can be included despite arriving slightly late.
By the way, in Community Informatics and other academic circles "first
mile" is widely used, and I think we should use it here. Specially, because
it was conceptualized within K-net [2], a successful example of providing
connectivity to communities by communities in the First Nations in Northern
Canada [3]. It would be interesting to know if they would subscribe the
Declaration.
Best,
carlos
[1]
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx
[2]
http://firstmile.ca/
[3]
http://knet.ca/
On 26 October 2016 at 00:27, <dc3(a)bob.ma> wrote:
Just as a reminder about idioms. Making some flight
reservations - the
points are called "miles" even on Air France
-----Original Message-----
From: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net [mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.
altermundi.net] On Behalf Of Nicolás Echániz
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 19:53
To: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net
Subject: Re: [DC3] RES: RES: Declaration
on Community Connectivity v.1.0
On 10/20/2016 12:00 PM, dc3(a)bob.ma wrote:
This is a question I sometimes ask – are terms
like “last mile”
idiomatic rather than referring to an actual
mile? Even worse is when
you have a naïve translator writing about the
last 1.6 km. If indeed
“last mile” is idiomatic then “first square mile”
works and “first
km^2 ” isn’t quite the same play on meme.
I also think of "last mile" as not referring to an actual mile nowadays.
The "distance" from "last mile" to "first square kilometer"
takes out the
fun in the expression :P
I prefer "first square mile" or even "first mile" when it's
written and
"first square mile" when we are talking and can explain the concept a bit.
I've found the coincidence of many people with an alternative view on the
Internet using the expression "first mile"; it's sort of "already
out
there".
Cheers!
Nico
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
--
Carlos Rey-Moreno, PhD
PostDoctoral Fellow University of the Western Cape
Zenzeleni Networks:
zenzeleni.net
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxTPSWMX26M
Cel: +27 (0) 76 986 3633
Skype: carlos.reymoreno Twitter: Creym