Life in the Network

In looking at the PIP reports included in the readings, I found little of the information surprising. I suppose as a well-acquainted user of the parallel universe we call the web, I am aware of its myriad of uses and ability to save (or just as often, waste) my time. In the Internet Penetration report it says: In all four categories (health information, job, hobbies and shopping), the internet earns the highest marks among the most frequent users. This statement seems like an obvious observation. It's sort of like saying those who walk around the city more find more convenient routes while those who stay in their house remain skeptical of these so-called "short-cuts." Sarcasm aside though, this observation says something about the increasing regularity of being connected. As the technology of the internet grows and changes, those with only casual access will fall further and further behind and thereby further and further alienate themselves from our fastest-growing technology. This trend will definitely expand the divide between the cyber-literate and non further than ever before, making reports like those we read this week valuable.
However, in the same article (Internet Penetration) I found something disturbing about the methodology. The data was gathered using phone surveys, leaving out a segment of the population from their sample. Whether we can believe it or not, there are people who do not, or cannot, have regular phone access. Financial burdens, as well as a high rate of address change, keep many people out of the reach of phone surveys. For this reason, I feel the optimistic "Look how everyone's coming around on this internet thing!" tone of the Internet Penetration report to be a bit under-supported and at least partially unrepresentative of reality.
I would feel like some kind of Big Brother disciple if I were to assert that every adult should have access to the internet and cyber-literacy. For a variety of reasons, there are people who simply do not feel the need to be connected. And in a time when American culture is exported like a cash crop, it is important to remember the dangers of an ethnocentric view of these issues. Surely it is becoming more and more necessary in mainstream American culture to have a good understanding and adequate ability to harness the potential of electronic communication. However, be it due to personal values or simple disinterest, there will always be people opposed to adopting its use. In the PIP report, The Ever-Shifting Internet Population, it says "more than half of non-Internet users – 56% of them – say they probably or definitely will not ever go online," and in light of this, a goal of having every adult online not only seems impractical but autocratic.
For the reasons listed above, I do support implementation of the internet into elementary and secondary educational settings. For the young generations today, the internet is something that will pervade much of their personal of professional lives. I use the word pervade intentionally as it seems, for better or worse, the internet is expanding and slowing replacing real-world establishments at a rate so quick, it would be inaccurate to say we're implementing it. More accurately, it feels as though we're the ones being implemented.
For this reason, I see the validity in the pure intentions of OLPC but have definite qualms with it as well. The goal of encouraging independent thinking and an understanding of technologies is surely a grand one and I don't doubt OLPC's good intentions. However, when many of these children suffer from malnutrition and live in a culture where even their elders have little use for, or to be gained from, such technology, such an implementation seems presumptuous.