Do you have any personal experience with the digital divide?

Yes, but not as one would expect. Having travelled in many places in Asia , one cannot help notice the ubiquity of Internet cafes even in remote places. Simple connectivity is not an issue for many anymore. In fact, once in the middle of the jungle of Borneo with the Iban headhunter tribe, in a steep valley, GPS would not work (not enough satellites to triangulate), but my European GSM cell phone would work just fine.

The digital divide moves further upstream. It is not simple connectivity or the ability to write emails that is difficult, but assumptions of applications and bandwidth being present at the user end. For example, Harvard's Kennedy School only accepts student applications through its web based system. This is close to impossible to do for those with buggy dialup connections in many developing countries. When I asked I was told that as most applicants can write emails, they can apply through the web as well. But that's not true: filing on the web requires bandwidth, a modern browser, Acrobat plugin and the like. Whenever developing countries overcome a connectivity hurdle it seems we tend to erect new ones. That's saddening.

Do you know of any organizations that make an effort to bridge the digital divide?

Yes, of course. Many. Let me just mention an unusual one: the WorldBank.

Internet access in low- or marginal-income areas is a problem partly because of the unavailability of broadband and telephone lines. Do you think wireless technology could provide a solution to this problem in such areas?

To an extent, yes. It depends on what the problem is for a particular area/demographic group: if it is “the last mile”, then wireless is great. If backbone connectivity is lacking or if equipment at the end points is lacking then wireless is of very limited utility. If it is money, then choosing a particular technology over another is not going to solve the problem. If it is education that's lacking, then wireless can't help at all. Take for example the case of Kerala's schools, where the IT rooms double up as Internet cafes during the evening. That's an intriguing way of offering connectivity embedded in the local institutions and structures.

In addition to a dearth of physical access in some locations, there have also been issues regarding people's acceptance of technology's ever-growing role in our societies. In many cases, these “don't-wants” are at an even greater disadvantage than the “have-nots.” Do you think people will come to embrace technology by themselves as time passes? What can be done to catalyze this process?

I think my example in answering question 3 provides a good pointer: many of the “have-nots” will move online if they see a specific benefit for doing so. Hence, if governments want to overcome the digital divide, they may want to create incentives for the “have-nots” to go online. Digital cameras and easy to use applications like IPhoto have made many grandparents in the US and Europe go online, to stay in contact with their loved ones far away. That's the type of “killer application” that will change user behaviour.

Language differences also contribute to the digital divide, but it is of interest for IT companies to make their products available to more consumers. Has there been any significant effort made to make the Internet and software in general more international? Do you think such efforts could help bridge the digital divide?

Yes, all large It companies have huge internationalization/localization departments. In addition, there exists an entire cottage industry offering localization services. But the challenge is elsewhere: localization is – believe it or not – very expensive. Hence, software producers will have to sell a lot of software to pay for it. For smaller countries with smaller markets this means that for many software products localization may not be worth it. Open sourcing the localization of software may help (here is a business idea!) to find local volunteers.

There's something of an “inventor dilemma” in the IT industry: is it better to produce expensive business computers for the elite, or to produce inexpensive computers for the low income public? Can you please explain where you stand on this?

That depends on the product. Remember Borland: It shattered the high price compiler market in the 1980s when offering TurboPascal for a fifth of Microsoft's. This strategy worked and brought down software cost because at that time enough consumers were willing to pay. Low cost mass market works where there is a mass market. High costs are necessary for niche products, which is why it is hard to envision Photoshop or even more specialized products to go open source.

In some developing countries, people are using pirated software as a response to their inability to afford genuine software. Do you think pirated software has the power to lessen the digital divide? How do you feel about its influence? Do you think free software (ex: the GNU project) would play a role in bridging the digital divide?

Yes, pirated software has the power to lessen the digital divide. So can free software. Software vendors would, I think, be ready and happy to sell software to disenfranchised groups and nations at a steep discount if that could move many people to become computer literate (and potential future consumers). The problem is that many of these discounted products may end up being sold to those that could afford full price. In other words, spill-over effects from one market to another make it hard to target specific demographic or geographic groups without hurting demand in affluent markets.

Do you think we have done, and continue to do, enough to bridge the digital divide? The way things appear now, do you think the divide will widen or narrow in the future? Why?

We have never done enough, do not do enough now, and quite frankly, will never do enough. Because the challenge is huge, and our resource (constrained by the willingness of humans to share their wealth with others) are limited.

What do you think would be the most effective solutions for the digital divide?

Not MIT Media Lab's wearable computer. Not glitzy high-tech, but solid, affordable and tried solutions for very specific yet unmet demands in developing countries and for disadvantaged demographic groups. That's what we should think about!