Are You Getting the Best Value from Your Internet Provider?

Information and communications technology (ICT) is an extensional term for information technology (IT) that stresses the role of unified communications^[1] and the integration of telecommunications (telephone lines and wireless signals) and computers, as well as necessary enterprise software, middleware, storage and audiovisual, that enable users to access, store, transmit, understand and manipulate information.

ICT is also used to refer to the convergence of audiovisuals and telephone networks with computer networks through a single cabling or link system. There are large economic incentives to merge the telephone networks with the computer network system using a single unified system of cabling, signal distribution, and management. ICT is an umbrella term that includes any communication device, encompassing radio, television, cell phones, computer and network hardware, satellite systems and so on, as well as the various services and appliances with them such as video conferencing and distance learning. ICT also includes analog technology, such as paper communication, and any mode that transmits communication.^[2]

ICT is a broad subject and the concepts are evolving.^[3] It covers any product that will store, retrieve, manipulate, process, transmit, or receive information electronically in a digital form (e.g., personal computers including smartphones, digital television, email, or robots). Skills Framework for the Information Age is one of many models for describing and managing competencies for ICT professionals in the 21st century.^[4]

The phrase "information and communication technologies" has been used by academic researchers since the 1980s.^[5] The abbreviation "ICT" became popular after it was used in a report to the UK government by Dennis Stevenson in 1997,^[6] and then in the revised National Curriculum for England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2000. However, in 2012, the Royal Society recommended that the use of the term "ICT" should be discontinued in British schools "as it has attracted too many negative connotations".^[7] From 2014, the National Curriculum has used the word computing, which reflects the addition of computer programming into the curriculum.^[8]

Variations of the phrase have spread worldwide. The United Nations has created a "United Nations Information and Communication Technologies Task Force" and an internal "Office of Information and Communications Technology".^[9]

The money spent on IT worldwide has been estimated as US$3.8 trillion^[10] in 2017 and has been growing at less than 5% per year since 2009. The estimated 2018 growth of the entire ICT is 5%. The biggest growth of 16% is expected in the area of new technologies (IoT, Robotics, AR/VR, and AI).^[11]

The 2014 IT budget of the US federal government was nearly $82 billion.^[12] IT costs, as a percentage of corporate revenue, have grown 50% since 2002, putting a strain on IT budgets. When looking at current companies' IT budgets, 75% are recurrent costs, used to "keep the lights on" in the IT department, and 25% are the cost of new initiatives for technology development.^[13]

The average IT budget has the following breakdown:^[13]

• 34% personnel costs (internal), 31% after correction
• 16% software costs (external/purchasing category), 29% after correction
• 33% hardware costs (external/purchasing category), 26% after correction
• 17% costs of external service providers (external/services), 14% after correction

The estimated amount of money spent in 2022 is just over US$6 trillion.^[14]

The world's technological capacity to store information grew from 2.6 (optimally compressed) exabytes in 1986 to 15.8 in 1993, over 54.5 in 2000, and to 295 (optimally compressed) exabytes in 2007, and some 5 zettabytes in 2014.^[15][16] This is the informational equivalent to 1.25 stacks of CD-ROM from the earth to the moon in 2007, and the equivalent of 4,500 stacks of printed books from the earth to the sun in 2014. The world's technological capacity to receive information through one-way broadcast networks was 432 exabytes of (optimally compressed) information in 1986, 715 (optimally compressed) exabytes in 1993, 1.2 (optimally compressed) zettabytes in 2000, and 1.9 zettabytes in 2007.^[15] The world's effective capacity to exchange information through two-way telecommunication networks was 281 petabytes of (optimally compressed) information in 1986, 471 petabytes in 1993, 2.2 (optimally compressed) exabytes in 2000, 65 (optimally compressed) exabytes in 2007,^[15] and some 100 exabytes in 2014.^[17] The world's technological capacity to compute information with humanly guided general-purpose computers grew from 3.0 × 10^8 MIPS in 1986, to 6.4 x 10^12 MIPS in 2007.^[15]

The following is a list of OECD countries by share of ICT sector in total value added in 2013.^[18]

Rank	Country	ICT sector in %	Relative size
1	South Korea	10.7	10.7
2	Japan	7.02	7.02
3	Ireland	6.99	6.99
4	Sweden	6.82	6.82
5	Hungary	6.09	6.09
6	United States	5.89	5.89
7	India	5.87	5.87
8	Czech Republic	5.74	5.74
9	Finland	5.60	5.6
10	United Kingdom	5.53	5.53
11	Estonia	5.33	5.33
12	Slovakia	4.87	4.87
13	Germany	4.84	4.84
14	Luxembourg	4.54	4.54
15	Switzerland	4.63	4.63
16	France	4.33	4.33
17	Slovenia	4.26	4.26
18	Denmark	4.06	4.06
19	Spain	4.00	4
20	Canada	3.86	3.86
21	Italy	3.72	3.72
22	Belgium	3.72	3.72
23	Austria	3.56	3.56
24	Portugal	3.43	3.43
25	Poland	3.33	3.33
26	Norway	3.32	3.32
27	Greece	3.31	3.31
28	Iceland	2.87	2.87
29	Mexico	2.77	2.77

The ICT Development Index ranks and compares the level of ICT use and access across the various countries around the world.^[19] In 2014 ITU (International Telecommunication Union) released the latest rankings of the IDI, with Denmark attaining the top spot, followed by South Korea. The top 30 countries in the rankings include most high-income countries where the quality of life is higher than average, which includes countries from Europe and other regions such as "Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Japan, Macao (China), New Zealand, Singapore, and the United States; almost all countries surveyed improved their IDI ranking this year."^[20]

On 21 December 2001, the United Nations General Assembly approved Resolution 56/183, endorsing the holding of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) to discuss the opportunities and challenges facing today's information society.^[21] According to this resolution, the General Assembly related the Summit to the United Nations Millennium Declaration's goal of implementing ICT to achieve Millennium Development Goals. It also emphasized a multi-stakeholder approach to achieve these goals, using all stakeholders including civil society and the private sector, in addition to governments.

To help anchor and expand ICT to every habitable part of the world, "2015 is the deadline for achievements of the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which global leaders agreed upon in the year 2000."^[22]

There is evidence that, to be effective in education, ICT must be fully integrated into the pedagogy. Specifically, when teaching literacy and math, using ICT in combination with Writing to Learn^[23][24] produces better results than traditional methods alone or ICT alone.^[25] The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), a division of the United Nations, has made integrating ICT into education as part of its efforts to ensure equity and access to education. The following, which was taken directly from a UNESCO publication on educational ICT, explains the organization's position on the initiative.

Information and Communication Technology can contribute to universal access to education, equity in education, the delivery of quality learning and teaching, teachers' professional development and more efficient education management, governance, and administration. UNESCO takes a holistic and comprehensive approach to promote ICT in education. Access, inclusion, and quality are among the main challenges they can address. The Organization's Intersectoral Platform for ICT in education focuses on these issues through the joint work of three of its sectors: Communication & Information, Education and Science.^[26]

Despite the power of computers to enhance and reform teaching and learning practices, improper implementation is a widespread issue beyond the reach of increased funding and technological advances with little evidence that teachers and tutors are properly integrating ICT into everyday learning.^[27] Intrinsic barriers such as a belief in more traditional teaching practices and individual attitudes towards computers in education as well as the teachers own comfort with computers and their ability to use them all as result in varying effectiveness in the integration of ICT in the classroom.^[28]

School environments play an important role in facilitating language learning. However, language and literacy barriers are obstacles preventing refugees from accessing and attending school, especially outside camp settings.^[29]

Mobile-assisted language learning apps are key tools for language learning. Mobile solutions can provide support for refugees' language and literacy challenges in three main areas: literacy development, foreign language learning and translations. Mobile technology is relevant because communicative practice is a key asset for refugees and immigrants as they immerse themselves in a new language and a new society. Well-designed mobile language learning activities connect refugees with mainstream cultures, helping them learn in authentic contexts.^[29]

ICT has been employed as an educational enhancement in Sub-Saharan Africa since the 1960s. Beginning with television and radio, it extended the reach of education from the classroom to the living room, and to geographical areas that had been beyond the reach of the traditional classroom. As the technology evolved and became more widely used, efforts in Sub-Saharan Africa were also expanded. In the 1990s a massive effort to push computer hardware and software into schools was undertaken, with the goal of familiarizing both students and teachers with computers in the classroom. Since then, multiple projects have endeavoured to continue the expansion of ICT's reach in the region, including the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, which by 2015 had distributed over 2.4 million laptops to nearly two million students and teachers.^[30]

The inclusion of ICT in the classroom, often referred to as M-Learning, has expanded the reach of educators and improved their ability to track student progress in Sub-Saharan Africa. In particular, the mobile phone has been most important in this effort. Mobile phone use is widespread, and mobile networks cover a wider area than internet networks in the region. The devices are familiar to student, teacher, and parent, and allow increased communication and access to educational materials. In addition to benefits for students, M-learning also offers the opportunity for better teacher training, which leads to a more consistent curriculum across the educational service area. In 2011, UNESCO started a yearly symposium called Mobile Learning Week with the purpose of gathering stakeholders to discuss the M-learning initiative.^[30]

Implementation is not without its challenges. While mobile phone and internet use are increasing much more rapidly in Sub-Saharan Africa than in other developing countries, the progress is still slow compared to the rest of the developed world, with smartphone penetration only expected to reach 20% by 2017.^[30] Additionally, there are gender, social, and geo-political barriers to educational access, and the severity of these barriers vary greatly by country. Overall, 29.6 million children in Sub-Saharan Africa were not in school in the year 2012, owing not just to the geographical divide, but also to political instability, the importance of social origins, social structure, and gender inequality. Once in school, students also face barriers to quality education, such as teacher competency, training and preparedness, access to educational materials, and lack of information management.^[30]

In modern society, ICT is ever-present, with over three billion people having access to the Internet.^[31] With approximately 8 out of 10 Internet users owning a smartphone, information and data are increasing by leaps and bounds.^[32] This rapid growth, especially in developing countries, has led ICT to become a keystone of everyday life, in which life without some facet of technology renders most of clerical, work and routine tasks dysfunctional.

The most recent authoritative data, released in 2014, shows "that Internet use continues to grow steadily, at 6.6% globally in 2014 (3.3% in developed countries, 8.7% in the developing world); the number of Internet users in developing countries has doubled in five years (2009–2014), with two-thirds of all people online now living in the developing world."^[20]

However, hurdles are still large. "Of the 4.3 billion people not yet using the Internet, 90% live in developing countries. In the world's 42 Least Connected Countries (LCCs), which are home to 2.5 billion people, access to ICTs remains largely out of reach, particularly for these countries' large rural populations."^[33] ICT has yet to penetrate the remote areas of some countries, with many developing countries dearth of any type of Internet. This also includes the availability of telephone lines, particularly the availability of cellular coverage, and other forms of electronic transmission of data. The latest "Measuring the Information Society Report" cautiously stated that the increase in the aforementioned cellular data coverage is ostensible, as "many users have multiple subscriptions, with global growth figures sometimes translating into little real improvement in the level of connectivity of those at the very bottom of the pyramid; an estimated 450 million people worldwide live in places which are still out of reach of mobile cellular service."^[31]

Favourably, the gap between the access to the Internet and mobile coverage has decreased substantially in the last fifteen years, in which "2015 was the deadline for achievements of the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which global leaders agreed upon in the year 2000, and the new data show ICT progress and highlight remaining gaps."^[22] ICT continues to take on a new form, with nanotechnology set to usher in a new wave of ICT electronics and gadgets. ICT newest editions into the modern electronic world include smartwatches, such as the Apple Watch, smart wristbands such as the Nike+ FuelBand, and smart TVs such as Google TV. With desktops soon becoming part of a bygone era, and laptops becoming the preferred method of computing, ICT continues to insinuate and alter itself in the ever-changing globe.

Information communication technologies play a role in facilitating accelerated pluralism in new social movements today. The internet according to Bruce Bimber is "accelerating the process of issue group formation and action"^[34] and coined the term accelerated pluralism to explain this new phenomena. ICTs are tools for "enabling social movement leaders and empowering dictators"^[35] in effect promoting societal change. ICTs can be used to garner grassroots support for a cause due to the internet allowing for political discourse and direct interventions with state policy^[36] as well as change the way complaints from the populace are handled by governments. Furthermore, ICTs in a household are associated with women rejecting justifications for intimate partner violence. According to a study published in 2017, this is likely because "access to ICTs exposes women to different ways of life and different notions about women's role in society and the household, especially in culturally conservative regions where traditional gender expectations contrast observed alternatives."^[37]

• Telehealth
  • A review found that in general, outcomes of such ICT-use – which were envisioned as early as 1925^[38] – are or can be as good as in-person care with health care use staying similar.^[39]
• Artificial intelligence in healthcare
• Software for COVID-19 pandemic mitigation
• mHealth
• Clinical decision support system and expert system
• Health administration and hospital information system
• Other health information technology and health informatics

Applications of ICTs in science, research and development, and academia include:

• Internet research
• Online research methods
• Science communication and communication between scientists
• Scholarly databases
• Applied metascience

Scholar Mark Warschauer defines a "models of access" framework for analyzing ICT accessibility. In the second chapter of his book, Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide, he describes three models of access to ICTs: devices, conduits, and literacy.^[40] Devices and conduits are the most common descriptors for access to ICTs, but they are insufficient for meaningful access to ICTs without third model of access, literacy.^[40] Combined, these three models roughly incorporate all twelve of the criteria of "Real Access" to ICT use, conceptualized by a non-profit organization called Bridges.org in 2005:^[41]

1. Physical access to technology
2. Appropriateness of technology
3. Affordability of technology and technology use
4. Human capacity and training
5. Locally relevant content, applications, and services
6. Integration into daily routines
7. Socio-cultural factors
8. Trust in technology
9. Local economic environment
10. Macro-economic environment
11. Legal and regulatory framework
12. Political will and public support

The most straightforward model of access for ICT in Mark Warschauer's theory is devices.^[40] In this model, access is defined most simply as the ownership of a device such as a phone or computer.^[40] Warschauer identifies many flaws with this model, including its inability to account for additional costs of ownership such as software, access to telecommunications, knowledge gaps surrounding computer use, and the role of government regulation in some countries.^[40] Therefore, Warschauer argues that considering only devices understates the magnitude of digital inequality. For example, the Pew Research Center notes that 96% of Americans own a smartphone,^[42] although most scholars in this field would contend that comprehensive access to ICT in the United States is likely much lower than that.

A conduit requires a connection to a supply line, which for ICT could be a telephone line or Internet line. Accessing the supply requires investment in the proper infrastructure from a commercial company or local government and recurring payments from the user once the line is set up. For this reason, conduits usually divide people based on their geographic locations. As a Pew Research Center poll reports, Americans in rural areas are 12% less likely to have broadband access than other Americans, thereby making them less likely to own the devices.^[43] Additionally, these costs can be prohibitive to lower-income families accessing ICTs. These difficulties have led to a shift toward mobile technology; fewer people are purchasing broadband connection and are instead relying on their smartphones for Internet access, which can be found for free at public places such as libraries.^[44] Indeed, smartphones are on the rise, with 37% of Americans using smartphones as their primary medium for internet access^[44] and 96% of Americans owning a smartphone.^[42]

In 1981, Sylvia Scribner and Michael Cole studied a tribe in Liberia, the Vai people, who have their own local script. Since about half of those literate in Vai have never had formal schooling, Scribner and Cole were able to test more than 1,000 subjects to measure the mental capabilities of literates over non-literates.^[45] This research, which they laid out in their book The Psychology of Literacy,^[45] allowed them to study whether the literacy divide exists at the individual level. Warschauer applied their literacy research to ICT literacy as part of his model of ICT access.

Scribner and Cole found no generalizable cognitive benefits from Vai literacy; instead, individual differences on cognitive tasks were due to other factors, like schooling or living environment.^[45] The results suggested that there is "no single construct of literacy that divides people into two cognitive camps; [...] rather, there are gradations and types of literacies, with a range of benefits closely related to the specific functions of literacy practices."^[40] Furthermore, literacy and social development are intertwined, and the literacy divide does not exist on the individual level.

Warschauer draws on Scribner and Cole's research to argue that ICT literacy functions similarly to literacy acquisition, as they both require resources rather than a narrow cognitive skill. Conclusions about literacy serve as the basis for a theory of the digital divide and ICT access, as detailed below:

There is not just one type of ICT access, but many types. The meaning and value of access varies in particular social contexts. Access exists in gradations rather than in a bipolar opposition. Computer and Internet use brings no automatic benefit outside of its particular functions. ICT use is a social practice, involving access to physical artifacts, content, skills, and social support. And acquisition of ICT access is a matter not only of education but also of power.^[40]

Therefore, Warschauer concludes that access to ICT cannot rest on devices or conduits alone; it must also engage physical, digital, human, and social resources.^[40] Each of these categories of resources have iterative relations with ICT use. If ICT is used well, it can promote these resources, but if it is used poorly, it can contribute to a cycle of underdevelopment and exclusion.^[45]

The Internet Protocol (IP) is the network layer communications protocol in the Internet protocol suite for relaying datagrams across network boundaries. Its routing function enables internetworking, and essentially establishes the Internet.

IP has the task of delivering packets from the source host to the destination host solely based on the IP addresses in the packet headers. For this purpose, IP defines packet structures that encapsulate the data to be delivered. It also defines addressing methods that are used to label the datagram with source and destination information. IP was the connectionless datagram service in the original Transmission Control Program introduced by Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn in 1974, which was complemented by a connection-oriented service that became the basis for the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). The Internet protocol suite is therefore often referred to as TCP/IP.

The first major version of IP, Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4), is the dominant protocol of the Internet. Its successor is Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6), which has been in increasing deployment on the public Internet since around 2006.^[1]

The Internet Protocol is responsible for addressing host interfaces, encapsulating data into datagrams (including fragmentation and reassembly) and routing datagrams from a source host interface to a destination host interface across one or more IP networks.^[2] For these purposes, the Internet Protocol defines the format of packets and provides an addressing system.

Each datagram has two components: a header and a payload. The IP header includes a source IP address, a destination IP address, and other metadata needed to route and deliver the datagram. The payload is the data that is transported. This method of nesting the data payload in a packet with a header is called encapsulation.

IP addressing entails the assignment of IP addresses and associated parameters to host interfaces. The address space is divided into subnets, involving the designation of network prefixes. IP routing is performed by all hosts, as well as routers, whose main function is to transport packets across network boundaries. Routers communicate with one another via specially designed routing protocols, either interior gateway protocols or exterior gateway protocols, as needed for the topology of the network.^[3]

There are four principal addressing methods in the Internet Protocol:

• Unicast delivers a message to a single specific node using a one-to-one association between a sender and destination: each destination address uniquely identifies a single receiver endpoint.
• Broadcast delivers a message to all nodes in the network using a one-to-all association; a single datagram (or packet) from one sender is routed to all of the possibly multiple endpoints associated with the broadcast address. The network automatically replicates datagrams as needed to reach all the recipients within the scope of the broadcast, which is generally an entire network subnet.
• Multicast delivers a message to a group of nodes that have expressed interest in receiving the message using a one-to-many-of-many or many-to-many-of-many association; datagrams are routed simultaneously in a single transmission to many recipients. Multicast differs from broadcast in that the destination address designates a subset, not necessarily all, of the accessible nodes.
• Anycast delivers a message to any one out of a group of nodes, typically the one nearest to the source using a one-to-one-of-many^[4] association where datagrams are routed to any single member of a group of potential receivers that are all identified by the same destination address. The routing algorithm selects the single receiver from the group based on which is the nearest according to some distance or cost measure.

In May 1974, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) published a paper entitled "A Protocol for Packet Network Intercommunication".^[5] The paper's authors, Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn, described an internetworking protocol for sharing resources using packet switching among network nodes. A central control component of this model was the Transmission Control Program that incorporated both connection-oriented links and datagram services between hosts. The monolithic Transmission Control Program was later divided into a modular architecture consisting of the Transmission Control Protocol and User Datagram Protocol at the transport layer and the Internet Protocol at the internet layer. The model became known as the Department of Defense (DoD) Internet Model and Internet protocol suite, and informally as TCP/IP.

The following Internet Experiment Note (IEN) documents describe the evolution of the Internet Protocol into the modern version of IPv4:^[6]

• IEN 2 Comments on Internet Protocol and TCP (August 1977) describes the need to separate the TCP and Internet Protocol functionalities (which were previously combined). It proposes the first version of the IP header, using 0 for the version field.
• IEN 26 A Proposed New Internet Header Format (February 1978) describes a version of the IP header that uses a 1-bit version field.
• IEN 28 Draft Internetwork Protocol Description Version 2 (February 1978) describes IPv2.
• IEN 41 Internetwork Protocol Specification Version 4 (June 1978) describes the first protocol to be called IPv4. The IP header is different from the modern IPv4 header.
• IEN 44 Latest Header Formats (June 1978) describes another version of IPv4, also with a header different from the modern IPv4 header.
• IEN 54 Internetwork Protocol Specification Version 4 (September 1978) is the first description of IPv4 using the header that would become standardized in 1980 as RFC 760.
• IEN 80
• IEN 111
• IEN 123
• IEN 128/RFC 760 (1980)

IP versions 1 to 3 were experimental versions, designed between 1973 and 1978.^[7] Versions 2 and 3 supported variable-length addresses ranging between 1 and 16 octets (between 8 and 128 bits).^[8] An early draft of version 4 supported variable-length addresses of up to 256 octets (up to 2048 bits)^[9] but this was later abandoned in favor of a fixed-size 32-bit address in the final version of IPv4. This remains the dominant internetworking protocol in use in the Internet Layer; the number 4 identifies the protocol version, carried in every IP datagram. IPv4 is defined in