What Kinds of Organisations do We Want to Build in Africa with Information Communication Technology?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the first half of this contribution, the author focuses on what information communication technology (ICT) could be implemented in Africa in order to integrate the continent into the emerging global culture and associated economy. In the second half, he assesses the state of ICT implementation in Africa. The emergence of worldwide information and communications technology (ICT) networks in the last quarter of the 20th century has steadily effected vast and permanent changes with regard to how people in free market open societies communicate, work, do business, and spend their leisure time. In spite of the recent bursting of the dot com bubble and increasing strains experienced in the ICT manufacturing sector, advances in information technology and telecommunications (ICT) will continue to reshape the major institutions of society in the 21st century. This ought to lead to a more efficient way of life for at least some people. However, it is not clear whether this “progress” will actually be satisfactory for all. There are many more facets to the application of ICT than simple business efficiency. This chapter asks, “after 50 years of ICT, what kind of society do we want to create for ourselves, and what level of choices are available to individuals and corporate entities?” As was pointed out at the EU meeting in Lisbon in 2000, we need to be particularly aware of the potential for ICT to improve the lives of those who are disadvantaged.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".