[HN Gopher] 37% of the world's population have still never used ... ___________________________________________________________________ 37% of the world's population have still never used the internet Author : giuliomagnifico Score : 157 points Date : 2021-12-26 19:04 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.itu.int) (TXT) w3m dump (www.itu.int) | vvoaterr wrote: | Well don't tell Facebook, those greedy bastards. They'd probably | provide the people in those countries with Facebook-only | smartphones, or Facebook-only Internet connections, or something | else horrible and dystopian like that. | PoignardAzur wrote: | I think people go way too hard on these Facebook-sponsored | internet deals. | | Like, yeah, they help build Facebook's brand and place it in a | position of market dominance... but they're doing that by | providing low-cost internet to vast populations that otherwise | couldn't afford it. | | There are millions of people that can talk to their relatives | and have better access to government services and communicate | with people they've never met, that would still be cut off if | not for Facebook. | sofixa wrote: | But it literally results in genocides (Rohingya) because | those people aren't technically literate and Facebook can't | be bothered to hide moderators for exotic (non-english) | languages. | | The benefits are great, but it's not among the things that | should be done by a for profit company, let alone one that | lives on "engagement". | cyberlurker wrote: | The key point is moderation is a requirement if they are | going to offer these services in new places. Hire locals | that speak the language to remove problematic content or | don't do this at all. | | I don't think being technically literate has anything to do | with it. We in the developed world are just as susceptible | to misinformation. | tentacleuno wrote: | > but they're doing that by providing low-cost internet to | vast populations that otherwise couldn't afford it. | | This is a tad misleading. Your sentence implies they are | given access to 'the internet', but in reality it's a select | list of Facebook-approved sites that are slimmed down. | Obviously, this sets a bad precedent and is anti-competitive | (other social media platforms on Internet.org, etc.). This is | far from the internet: this is a locked-down Facebook- | controlled vision of what _they 'd_ like the internet to be. | iszomer wrote: | If I could give an analogy: if facebook is the hammer, | everything would look like a nail and we (in a civilized | society) would know the difference whereas people new to such | platform may not. | | The UN may be the arbiter of global politics but what they | might be exempting are people whom are part of the "opt out" | crowd or, would rather not have to explicitly opt out of such | (free) services. | tentacleuno wrote: | > They'd probably provide the people in those countries with | Facebook-only smartphones, or Facebook-only Internet | connections, or something else horrible and dystopian like | that. | | Have you heard about internet.org[0]? | | [0]: | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... | (there are so many articles on what's wrong with it / public | outcry, I'm just going to link the search results.) | wackro wrote: | The problem with getting the remaining communities connected is | that there are no AOL CDs left, and even if more could be | supplied, devices tend not to have CD drives. | dreyfan wrote: | That's a lot of people who haven't had the opportunity to invest | in bitcoin, defi, or nfts! | vmception wrote: | Or use any SaaS tool that solves problems they dont currently | have | ssss11 wrote: | Or tell Google, Facebook and Amazon everything about themselves | for free!! | kingcharles wrote: | Aaargh20318 wrote: | Even after all these years using the internet, it still | manages to make me to say 'whathefuck' once in a while. | spiderice wrote: | That made me jealous of the 37% | epicureanideal wrote: | Does that mean the Eternal September[1] is almost over? | | We're about at what, September 20th or so? Maybe later in the | month if we account for people too young to use the internet, or | unable to do so for some reason. | | Or maybe it has already ended, if we define it as a ratio of new | internet users joining per month compared to the existing user | base [2]. | | Question: What will be the effect of the majority of internet | users being EXPERIENCED internet users, increasingly so over | time, compared to the last 10-20 years where a higher proportion | has been new, inexperienced users? | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September | | [2] "Whereas the regular September student influx would quickly | settle down, the influx of new users from AOL did not end and | Usenet's existing culture did not have the capacity to integrate | the sheer number of new users" (from [1]) | vlovich123 wrote: | It's about the size of the network, not the size of the | Internet. There are many community networks that run atop the | Internet. Each one will have an eternal September if they move | from niche to popularity and have their culture changed. In | fact this phenomenon isn't even new to the Internet. As | companies or countries grow many bemoan about how "the | organization just isn't what it used to be" while ignoring that | this is kind of the "success" state where others are coming in | and contributing their own piece of it. | kbenson wrote: | The whole idea of a culture being a static thing that | shouldn't change has always seemed rather shortsighted to me. | What people are complaining about is that it's changing fast | enough for them to notice before they've become crotchety old | people (who always complain about the youth...). People act | like cultural identity is so tied to these traditions that if | you took their grandpatenys and introduced them to their own | ancestors from 10 generations back that all their traditions | would be the same. My guess is that they would both be aghast | at what each other does, for different reasons. | | The internet is just a continuation of this, in myriad | different subgroups with their own norms, and like everyone | else, they don't like change (but usually only when it | inconveniences or is easily extrapolated to situations they | see to do with themselves). | acover wrote: | Internet culture has changed permanently. | lostlogin wrote: | This statement of yours will be complete if someone weighs in | to disagree, attack you and finishes by flagging your | comment. | jjoonathan wrote: | Once we're done with that, we can move on to the real | substance and start arguing about which one of us is more | like Hitler. | makk wrote: | And then let the algorithms amplify the most infuriating | of those arguments. | id wrote: | It will continue to change, as all things tend to do. | tester756 wrote: | How many great hackers we're losing, damn. | Zababa wrote: | We're not losing anyone. We may not be getting them, but that's | not the same thing. | westcort wrote: | Frequent exposures to infrequent events tend not to occur even | once in 37% of populations. The ratio is the same as 1/e. I | wonder if that is what is going on here? | LeoPanthera wrote: | How much of that 37% is young children? Toddlers or infants? | lotsofpulp wrote: | I assumed kids started using internet at 2 these days, based on | my anecdotal data, and assuming apps like Khan Academy Kids and | PBS Kids count. Or, unfortunately, YouTube. | gjsman-1000 wrote: | How much of that population is seniors who've decided they | don't get it or don't know about it? | | Heck, how much if this population is imprisoned or | incapacitated? | [deleted] | notimetorelax wrote: | Around 20% judging by this data: | https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/pop1.asp | nuclearnice1 wrote: | Consistent with this line from the article: | | > On average, 71 per cent of the world's population aged | 15-24 is using the Internet, compared with 57 per cent of all | other age groups. This generational gap is reflected across | all regions. It is most pronounced in the LDCs, where 34 per | cent of young people are connected, compared with only 22 per | cent of the rest of the population. | | LDCs : Least Developed Countries | [deleted] | giuliomagnifico wrote: | AGES 0-17 IN THE UNITED STATES | giuliomagnifico wrote: | Under 5 years old they should be about 8.5% (678 million): | https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/under-5-population?countr... | 999900000999 wrote: | I'd love to see some comparisons on rates of mental illness in | these no net places vs the wealthy west. | waterlaw wrote: | Honestly been struggling with mental illness and think the | majority of it has come from internet use. | 999900000999 wrote: | Do not take internet advice seriously. | | But they do have no internet retreats you can try. You can | also just leave your phone at home and ride an Amtrak for 3 | days. | pwdisswordfish9 wrote: | Ignorance is bliss. | RGamma wrote: | Except if you live in the third world. Then it's a curse. | simplestats wrote: | The point is, whatever is happening, is shockingly bad. | Please accept our cookies and click on 'read more' to load | more ads and outrageous facts. | notahacker wrote: | _At least the poor, the illiterate and North Koreans don 't | have to deal with the horror of ad retargeting and | listicles_ is the most HN perspective ever! | frontman1988 wrote: | North Sentinelese seem pretty content though | nowherebeen wrote: | Is that really that bad though? Internet should be a tool and not | an addiction. | hutzlibu wrote: | You are free to leave the internet. | | But most people who did not used the internet, probably had | other reasons for not being online, yet. | | So why not give them a chance to explore the internet as a tool | and not addiction? | kylehotchkiss wrote: | Maybe for the better? The internet hasn't been the positive life | force many in the global south have needed. WhatsApp rumors, | TikTok, crypto scams... there's nobody warning them about all | these things. | leovailati wrote: | People tend to emphasize the negatives, like you mentioned, but | WhatsApp has revolutionized communication in the low-income | country I came from. And I think ultimately creating a net | benefit for society (even though the conspiracy theories are | really bad). Calling/texting using the cellular networks is | still pretty expensive, so a lot of mom-and-pop shops conduct a | significant portion of their business over WhatsApp (for a | fraction of the cost of an equivalent 1-800 number). | kingcharles wrote: | TikTok always get a lot of negativity because it's a cheap, | easy joke to throw out there. Even I am guilty of abusing it | this way. If you open a new account you get a lot of retarded | videos, but if you stay for a while and let the blackbox | algorithm work its magic then you can find some incredibly | insightful videos, especially around topics of neurodivergence, | mental health and gender/sexual diversity. | yosito wrote: | > The internet hasn't been the positive life force many in the | global south have needed | | As someone who's spent a lot of time in the global south and | met a lot of people whose livelihoods depend on the internet, | I'm curious what evidence you have to back up your claim. | vanusa wrote: | The commenter made a perfectly reasonable observation, | actually, which could apply just as well to any sweeping | modernization (for example the advent of mass-scale global | trade, the collapse of state socialism in Eastern Europe, or | even colonialism). Each of these transformations have created | winners and losers within the affected countries, and a heck | of a lot of social churn to boot. It's pretty superficial to | just say "net overall benefit, nevermind the losers" any of | these cases. | | So I'd say the onus is on _you_ to provide comprehensive data | to support your sweeping claim that the number of losers has | been apparently negligible in the countries (including all | factors, not just economic). And that 's _data_ , not your | pile of subjective observations from the biased selection of | people you met, here and there. | inglor_cz wrote: | "Every technical development has its social downsides" | isn't a very deep or original observation. | vanusa wrote: | That's the whole point - it's kind of obvious actually. | | Yet the commenter above was treating like a bold | proposition that needs mounts of evidence to support. | throwawayboise wrote: | The internet has made a lot of things more convenient | (sending mail, ordering goods and services for example) but | there were solutions to these problems before (postal mail, | catalogs, phone/mail order, etc). | | The new stuff (social media in particular, and the | instantaneous, always-connected nature of things in general, | and the privacy-invading tendencies of online providers) is | what we haven't figured out yet, and where most of the | negative effect is coming from. | yosito wrote: | > there were solutions to these problems before | | Are you talking about the global south? | jarenmf wrote: | As someone coming from a failed state, the Internet is probably | the recent invention with most tangible positive impact on | people's lives. Even with Facebook, WhatsApp, TikTok, ... etc | the pros hugely outweigh the cons. | Guest42 wrote: | True, I feel like removing 90 percent of my non-work internet | usage would be very helpful. | inglor_cz wrote: | Try quitting social networks and reading more on educational | sites such as Wikipedia. There is a lot of amazing things out | there. | | One does not have to be dragged into the "OUTRAGE OF THE | DAY!" mud that is Twitter or Facebook. | reilly3000 wrote: | 31% of the world's adults are 'unbanked' and rely on cash and | dark credit. In the 1970's a similar amount lacked electricity. | It's global ways of living are remarkably diverse, and I for one | hope they stay that way. Homogeneous is bad for our species. | keewee7 wrote: | I want to know which countries had the biggest rise in laptop and | desktop computer users. | | In many 3rd world countries people only use the Internet to | access Facebook and WhatsApp on their smartphones. | Ericson2314 wrote: | What hellishness. Hope the world gets it shit together to end | such immiseration someday. | notsureaboutpg wrote: | vbezhenar wrote: | In my country Instagram is nightmaringly popular. I hate it, | but I'm forced to use it, because more and more businesses have | their Instagram account as their webpage with prices, contacts, | etc. It seems ridiculous. UX is so terrible. It's not indexed | by Google. I can understand when some girl publishes her | selfies, probably Instagram is good for that, but not for | business web presence. | sweetheart wrote: | It's clearly fulfilling something important for the | businesses. | indigochill wrote: | The "developer" experience is pretty great compared to the | alternative, though. If you can set up your corporate | presence on a social media platform that means you're paying | nothing for (and not dealing with the hassle of) hosting or | domain name registration or even email (if you only | communicate via your platform of choice). Sure, you're a | slave to Instagram, but -practically- that doesn't matter to | most businesses that choose this path. | | The only way to break this I can imagine would be for someone | to provide a pipeline that seamlessly automates the domain | name registration and hosting for these businesses (similar | to how Let's Encrypt popularized HTTPS by reducing the | technical hoops to jump through). It would probably have to | be funded similarly to Let's Encrypt as well, because in | countries where Instagram is the de facto business platform, | they're certainly not going to pay for this service. | sofixa wrote: | Wix, Squarespace already do this pretty well, and some | alternatives like WordPress.com have free hosting and | (sub)domain. | tshaddox wrote: | The UX might not be great, but at least it establishes a | floor for how bad the company's web presence will be. I can't | count the number of supposed company websites I've | encountered that are totally broken, or replaced by a parked | domain because they probably haven't paid their bills for 10 | years, or literally using a flash embed that browsers don't | support any more, etc. I'd honestly rather see the social | media profile. It's unlikely to be broken and it's more | likely to be up to date. | londons_explore wrote: | This is key. For small businesses, their web presence must | require no ongoing costs, be in the same walled garden that | the users look in, and no expertise to set up or edit. | | Small businesses that have paid a web developer to make | them a website rarely get a good return on their | investment. | tentacleuno wrote: | > Small businesses that have paid a web developer to make | them a website rarely get a good return on their | investment. | | What if they make their own website? It's relatively easy | these days, depending on what you want to do (and if it | isn't, there are packages to help!). | type0 wrote: | Let's say a barista have to update the instagram account | their cafeteria, requiring them to update a WP site is | millions more effort taxing on the employee and means | they won't do it (at least not on their private phone as | it's expected). Must be one of the reasons I often see | those overly huge signs "follow us on instagram" so | often. | AussieWog93 wrote: | I've been in this position myself (as someone with an | engineering background!!), and it's a matter of effort | vs. return. | | Far fewer customers care about a website than an active | social media profile, and the effort required to maintain | them, secure them and set them up is orders of magnitude | higher. | | If you're a growing small business, there are typically | much better ways to invest your time. | frereubu wrote: | Have to admit, my first thought was "lucky them". | INTPenis wrote: | Seems to me that 37% could easily encompass small children, old | people, tribes, prisoners and some living under oppressive | regimes. So in other words, pretty much everyone uses the | internet. | jfax wrote: | Don't know why we should casually dismiss these people? Small | children in developed countries use the internet. Old and | tribes people deserve access to knowledge. And prisoners/those | under oppressive regimes. | INTPenis wrote: | I'm not saying this number won't grow. It will absolutely | grow, if only because we will all get older. | | But it's likely that the number is relatively maxed out, | which is kinda interesting. Everyone who can uses the | internet. | | And among those who can't are children who will soon use it, | rural people who might soon use it and oppressed people who | might experience a revolution, migration or whatever reason | to then use the internet. | waterlaw wrote: | The internet has a lot of benefits. | | My issues aren't with the internet, but advancements made with | social media. | | The addictive nature of many platforms. The hivemind and lack of | free thought I've noticed in many avenues of the internet. | | Having upvotes vs downvotes or likes vs dislikes encourages | conformity. It encourages group think. | | This group think is ultimately what's driving me off the larger | platforms on the internet and away from social media in general. | rconti wrote: | Isn't that basically how society works? Social pressure | encourages groupthink. | btmiller wrote: | Access to audiences beyond a handful in size are much rarer | than what you can easily find online. | loceng wrote: | Peter Wang in the recent Lex Fridman interview - | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0-SXS6zdEQ - gave me names for | concepts I'd been noticing but couldn't quite put my finger on, | essentially the pitfalls and externalized costs of "homogeneous | demand" that's created via ads and algorithms - driving | consumerism through making economy of scale easier to reach by | generating more buyers at same time, and similarly leads to | ideology or group think as you mention. | tqi wrote: | What do you do to avoid groupthink outside of larger platforms? | makk wrote: | Stay away from social media in general, is what they said. | gadflyinyoureye wrote: | Read other groupthink. Pick a topic and read multiple views. | Even horrible ones. Then you can understand, synthesize, and | rebut views. | lettergram wrote: | It may be controversial but I believe 3 things can be done: | | 1. Government grants for open source alternative development. | Aka fed oversee and what not can apply for grants. | | 2. Label all social media and phones common carriers. | | 3. Require common carriers to be subject to FOIA and audits | by citizens. This would include source code. They can still | profit from being centralized for the time being, because of | networking effects that likely won't change. | | My final thought is that social media shouldn't be tied to | ones public identity. | Retric wrote: | The Overton window is a form of group think that's | pervasive across what people think of as the political | spectrum. Outsider views isn't simply pro and anti X, or | even flat earth whack jobs it's the full realm of | possibilities. | | It's easy to think of say communism in reference to the | horrors of recent history, but it showed up before the US | civil war. In the context of slavery and the often stated | "need" to compensate people who owned slaves before freeing | them it suddenly seems very different. Which just | demonstrates how ideologies are shaped by the time period. | clavicat wrote: | kerneloftruth wrote: | I'd love to see a study comparing the attention spans, anxiety | level, and overall mental health of that 37% relative to the | other 63%. They might be slightly less informed, but I'd bet | significantly healthier (mentally). | framecowbird wrote: | This would be a terrible study to try to ascertain the impact | of the internet on mental health. You would be comparing two | populations who are completely different in many many ways. | xiphias2 wrote: | I know poor people getting into 200% APR loans because of not | getting a job during COVID and no math knowledge for | refinancing smartly. If you think the bottom 50% is not anxious | all the time, you are lucky to live in the 1st world. | drdeca wrote: | While I can't imagine how this could be anything but a | coincidence, but it still strikes me that this 37% is | approximately 1/e . | hickoryswindle wrote: | mwattsun wrote: | I hope someone has selected a control group to see how the | internet and especially social media changes people | | My favorite example is how when missionaries contacted the Piraha | people, there was a missionary who was a language expert to learn | their language quickly to do Bible teachings. He postulated their | language didn't have recursion, which caused quite a bit of | debate with Noam Chomsky and others. My take away from learning | about this is that the Piraha people didn't have a notion of past | and future ("It's always been this way") and how they were | totally transformed for the worse, in my opinion, by watching and | seemingly becoming addicted to watching television | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_people | | https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Pirah%C3%A3 | [deleted] | kazinator wrote: | What is the definition of "internet" or "online" here? | | Suppose the definition includes the concept of "social networking | application on your mobile device that works over the Internet | even though you don't have a data plan due to a special | arrangement". | | I would not count that as online. | | It's likely that more than 37% are offline according to a proper | definition of online which means that you have a device with a | data plan which lets you use whatever Internet-based applications | you want and visit whatever websites you want. | | By the "visit whatever" criterion, entire nations are offline. | All of China that doesn't have a foreign VPN is offline, and so | that's about 1.4B right there. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-12-26 23:00 UTC)