this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
63 points (95.7% liked)
Fediverse
28380 readers
1245 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
On average, we are rich enough to have plenty of gadgets around.
Those in extreme poverty need access to more important things than access to these gadgets.
We're going down a sidetrack here but this is just false. A smartphone these days is a ticket to many things required to live. Applying for jobs, applying for government services, buying essential items cheaply, cheap/free education.
None of these things are even close to be available to people in extreme poverty.
Think "no access to running water or sewage systems" levels of poverty, not "living in a ghetto area of an European or North American country".
Yes, even for them, the information they can get through a phone is lifesaving. They can learn how to build water supply and sanitation systems and shelter. They can learn how to farm and forage for food. They can find the best way to cross international borders and become a refugee. And so on, they can improve every aspect of their lives. Information is power, and with a smartphone they have access to the entire world, rather than just word of mouth knowledge in their local community.
Obviously, places without any form of electricity are screwed, but satellite internet is rapidly becoming cheaper and more accessible so soon they won't even need cell coverage.
I was using old smartphones as an example of the amount of excess computing power available which goes unused, not what people can do with it.
Your argument is just missing the point and annoying sophistry. Can you please just drop it?