Hacker News Reader

Comment by rwmj | Hacker News Reader

I posted this because I think we tend to live in a bubble where everyone carries multiple internet connected devices on their person at all times (only a slight exaggeration!). But there are over 11 million people in a first world country who don't use the internet at all, and likely many more who have access but it's limited to eg only an old desktop PC or only at work. How should internet-based start-ups react to this?

View on HN

By leaving those people alone to continue living their lives as they like?

If it’s by choice, sure. A lot of people either can’t afford it or there’s no Connectivity where they live

> or there’s no Connectivity where they live

Which unfortunately in the UK is an issue. I have no mobile phone reception at home (20 miles as the crow flies from Charing Cross station in London), so if my only access to the internet was through a phone then I might be one of these people.

96% of UK premises could have "Superfast", not just "Internet" but "Superfast" broadband, which is defined as 30Mbps to the door. But you're correct that a very large fraction of the population don't choose to buy this either because they can't afford it or they don't want it.

There is a Universal Service Obligation, just like in the days of voice telephony, which says the incumbent (British Telecom in most of the country) is legally obliged to offer anybody who wants it at least a minimum service (10Mbps down 1Mbps up asymmetric, so mediocre DSL basically) for a fee. In unusual cases (imagine you live on an otherwise uninhabited island for some reason or up a mountain) you may need to contribute to capital costs for installation.

About 2% of the country are estimated to /live/ in places that can't get USO obligatory service (without new construction) if they asked. Unsurprisingly people who want fast Internet don't tend to buy properties with problems like that, but in principle if you were stubborn you could buy one and demand they fix it to 10Mbps up 1Mbps down.

So, whatever it is the problem is not Connectivity.

Those are all goals and numbers thrown around by politicians and ISPs, though. They're not reality.

Just a couple of days ago I heard on BBC Radio Devon that some broadband provider in that area got its license revoked because it didn't meet its commitments.

It's like how the American cell phone companies claim to provide LTE access to 95% of Americans, yet somehow there are still several tens of millions of people on slow 4G, 3G, or with zero cell service at all.

-shrug- Doing work only changes the facts, which I reported. We can't change what you believe, that has to be left to you to do.

One of my friends works in IT, he's like third line support for some big international outfit. He's a Windows guy but still, you'd expect he knows what he's doing. One day he complained about how shitty his broadband is. So I asked why he doesn't have FTTC. "It's not available". OK, so I punch in his landline phone number and the system says of course yeah like almost everybody else in my entire city he can have FTTC.

Yes, it costs more money and that might make it unattractive to some people, but it's right there, I'd guess it took maybe 5-10 days from that conversation until he had FTTC instead of ADSL.

>He's a Windows guy but still, you'd expect he knows what he's doing.

Weird flex but ok.

> 96% of UK premises could have "Superfast", not just "Internet" but "Superfast" broadband, which is defined as 30Mbps to the door.

Ha ha, that's hilarious. Out here in the real world although the maps show that I'm getting 4G mobile and "superfast"[1] broadband, the reality is no mobile at all and 20 Mbps when it's not raining and the BT culverts aren't waterlogged. When they are waterlogged, not much internet at all.

[1] Where "superfast" means laughably slow compared to most other first world countries.

Isn't that USO voluntary?

> In unusual cases (imagine you live on an otherwise uninhabited island for some reason or up a mountain) you may need to contribute to capital costs for installation.

I agree with you, but this bit doesn't really describe how many people need to pay for broadband infrastructure installation.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2018/may/31/h...

The USO is mandatory but isn't funded yet. So, right now the regulator would struggle to rationalise say, fining the operator for not meeting it when they aren't given any money or any means to raise revenue to provide it. But in principle if you can imagine the British government ever doing anything again except arguing about Brexit they might get around to it. Don't hold your breath.

The article says they come from low incomes. Most likely these people don't like being too poor to be able to use the internet.

It’s tough because old people are generally more intelligent and wiser than average and have more free time, it’s not strictly speaking about accessibility, learning, stuff like that.

Personally I believe you get older and desire a certain emotional / stimulation product that software does quite a bad job at delivering.

Like Facebook helps validate your opinions but not by design, other old people just post stuff that their old friends will see. Email helps you feel busy but it’s not the same sense as being The Chairman of Your Company. Photos let you see your family but it’s not the same as lording over everyone in your big house on a holiday.

I’m not trying to cast these feelings of power as something negative, just trying to characterize something that Snapchat and Instagram are very good at delivering for young people (power by sexualization) that does not at all appeal to old people.

Startups generally don’t serve old people not because of lack of access, that’s more about whether the company can have a VC growth trajectory. If that’s the limit of your point, well just advertise on the radio, CNN and church instead of Facebook ads. But the more important point is how to make something for this population they actually want.

It's mostly about accessibility though. If something can provide a lot of value, but is inaccessible for people using an ipad with voice typing, it's the same as if doesn't exist at all for those people. And since most things are like that, the overall value of an internet connected ipad for them is not that high.

I think old people are not more or less intelligent than average people, they are probably average; but I agree that many are wiser than average. I think many people in old age are sadly very lonely, with much less connection to society and I think they'd love to find a connection to other people. I think in my generation, people who use a computer frequently and were born after 1960? say, they will be able to form connections on the net.

While I'm just spouting opinions here, let me add that I think startups don't look at the needs of older people because they don't know about their lives well enough to think about problems that need solving.

I think old people are not more or less intelligent than average people, they are probably average

We gain a substantial part of our intelligence through experience. A 17-year-old is more intelligent than a seven-year-old in large part because of his experience.

It seems only logical that someone who has lived twice as long as I have and has had twice as many experiences and twice as long to learn should be smarter than I am.

To me you are describe wisdom, not intelligence. But I agree that time earned knowledge is very useful and valuable.

There’s a pretty big jump in brain development between 7 and 17 wtf is this comment thread.

I expect higher quality, fact based commentary from hn.

This whole thread read like something off a trash subreddit.

> How should internet-based start-ups react to this?

Should they? This reads to me like "how should car washes react to people who don't have a car?"

If I owned a car wash and people in my city were abandoning cars, why wouldn't I need to react to that trend? If my customer base is shrinking, I would certainly need to reexamine the business and possibly look into alternative uses for the property.

I think accessibility should definitely be more of a focus in tech companies, as the current trend is fairly poor.

That's different, this would only apply if there was an observed trend of the population abandoning the internet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com