Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Government Networking The Internet United States Politics Technology

Cuba's Pending Tech Revolution 122

dcblogs writes The White House order last week lifting economic sanctions against Cuba specifically singles out technology, from telecommunication networks to consumer tech. There's much potential and many obstacles. Cuba has an educated population craving technology, but it has little income for new tech. The Cuban government wants to trade with the U.S., but is paranoid about the outside world and has limited Internet access to 5% to 10% of the population, at best. "The government has been very reluctant to have open Internet access," said Harley Shaiken, chairman of the Center for Latin American Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. But "there is real hunger for technology," and with the easing of the embargo, the government "will be facing new pressures," he said. The country needs a complete technology upgrade, including to its electric grid, and the money to finance these improvements. "Markets like Cuba, which will require a wholesale construction of new infrastructure, don't come along often, if ever," said Todd Thibodeaux, president and CEO of CompTIA, a tech industry trade group. "The flood of companies lining up to get in should be quite substantial," he said. Cuba has a population of about 11 million, about the same size as the Dominican Republic, which spends about $1 billion annually on technology and related services, according to IDC. But capital spending today on IT in Cuba may be no more than $200 million annually.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cuba's Pending Tech Revolution

Comments Filter:
  • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) * on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:07PM (#48845095)

      As we know, there is quite a bit that the President can do without congress. As well, with the lifting of restrictions that are within the President's power, a "critical mass" for full lifting will build. Don't fool yourself, it will - and should - happen.

      • As we know, there is quite a bit that the President can do without congress

        like close guantanamo for example ....

        • by peragrin ( 659227 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @03:27PM (#48845873)

          Obama can close guantamo. He can't transfer prisoners. He can't get them trials on american soil.

          Congress didn't stop the closing of that base the govenors did by refusing transfer requests.

          • Actually, it's more that Congress stopped it by barring spending any money on transfers. So Obama could likely close Gitmo, but only by actually just closing it - take the fences down, leave the prisoners to their own devices.

            I'm pretty sure that's a level of "F*ck you" to Congress that he didn't want to get into, but maybe now.... After all, what are they going to do, stop cooperating with him? Attempt to roll back what's arguably his biggest domestic achievement?
          • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

            Hmm, I seem to remember one US capital that is outside that legal requirement and when they wanted to legalise MJ the Republican led congress and senate sought to block it. It is pretty obvious Uncle Tom Obama the Choom gang coward only seeks to do many things when he is sure the Republicans will be able to block it, so nothing more than PR=B$ to try to keep gullible voters on side. So lets push net neutrality when they are sure that Republicans can block it. Next up it will be universal health care, whoop

      • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @02:20PM (#48845511) Homepage Journal

        As much as I like what's happening recently, I'm really troubled by the *way* it's happening.

        Eric holder just gutted civil forfeiture [google.com]. That's a good move, should have been repealed 30 years ago, I'm all for it.

        Has anyone noticed that a single man who was not elected gets to pick-and-choose which laws he will enforce? Here's a man in the executive branch who decided unilaterally to dump an entire law. The legislature can pass or repeal laws, that's their job. The supreme court can bless or condemn laws, that's their job.

        But the executive branch?

        Can they just unilaterally pick and choose which laws(*) they will prosecute?

        Similarly, Obama told Holder awhile back [google.com] not to pursue "Defense of marriage" cases. That's fine too, the law should never have been passed and should have been dumped long ago.

        Has anyone noticed that this was done by the executive branch all on its own, with no oversight?

        I'm troubled by this because everyone accepts the outcome because the results are so good. The ends justify the means in these cases, it's so good to get these laws off the books that we don't notice *how* they got repealed.

        To be specific, in the future we will see the executive branch gutting laws more often, and if people complain they will point to these good results and say "it's OK for us to do this now because no one complained when we did it previously".

        This is a troubling turn of events.

        (*) I'm making a distinction between pick-and-choose laws, as opposed to pick-and-choose cases, the latter of which is within the discretion of the prosecutor. Yes, there's line, and yes it can be abused.

        • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Sunday January 18, 2015 @04:21PM (#48846127) Homepage Journal

          Has anyone noticed that this was done by the executive branch all on its own, with no oversight?

          No, the executive branch is the oversight. Congress wanted those people prosecuted, but the president acted as a check and prevented it from happening.

          • Has anyone noticed that this was done by the executive branch all on its own, with no oversight?

            No, the executive branch is the oversight. Congress wanted those people prosecuted, but the president acted as a check and prevented it from happening.

            So, like he said, you think it's OK because you like the outcome.

            • So, like he said, you think it's OK because you like the outcome.

              No, I like the outcome, and I think it's OK because nothing happened.

        • Eric holder just gutted civil forfeiture. That's a good move, should have been repealed 30 years ago, I'm all for it.

          I see you've fallen for the PR-spin version. The administration loves making it SEEM like they're reformers when they really did very little. What Holder actually did was limit the ability of state and local governments to seize assets under federal law, then later have a federal agency 'adopt' the seizure and take a percent cut under the 'equitable sharing' program. This is bypassed by simply categorizing something as a joint investigation and sticking some feds name on the papers. As if that wasn't a hole

        • I don't think it's unconstitutional for the president to refuse to enforce laws. That's kind of a good thing, because it gives him power to not prosecute whistleblowers, for example. Or if congress passes any other stupid, punitive law, it's one extra check that keeps people from losing their freedoms as a result.

          On the other hand, if Ted Cruz becomes president, things could get wildly crazy as a result of this precedent. "President Cruz has decreed he will not enforce laws requiring people to pay taxes,
          • by dbIII ( 701233 )

            if Ted Cruz becomes president

            Tricky, because if the oil price stays low he'll have to explain to a lot of Texans that have lost their jobs why he's personally in the pockets of those Saudis that caused to job losses.

            • lol I hope it's tricky for more reasons than that. If Ted Cruz becomes president, the best I can hope for is entertainment.
        • But the executive branch?

          Can they just unilaterally pick and choose which laws(*) they will prosecute?

          Thats how the law has always worked. Don't blame Obama, blame the founding fathers. (Not that they'll hear, being dead and all that)

          Similarly, Obama told Holder awhile back [google.com] not to pursue "Defense of marriage" cases. That's fine too, the law should never have been passed and should have been dumped long ago.

          Well within his legal rights, as envisioned by the founding fathers.

          Has anyone noticed th

          • It's pretty funny, actually, for those of us with memory. When George Bush was in office the lefties screamed, howled, and wailed about how he was "shredding the constitution" with executive over reach. Then Obama gets in there, on promises he would do no such thing, and doubles down on damn near everything. And what are the lefties saying "Well, Obama has done nothing here that every president before him hasn't done"

            And when a Republican gets elected, the howling and screaming about executive over-re
        • by dbIII ( 701233 )

          Has anyone noticed that this was done by the executive branch all on its own, with no oversight?

          Going from many of the comments in the place it's how a lot of Americans think their country is run anyway. "Why hasn't the President done X? Why hasn't he done Y?" ignores that there is a government and not a King.
          So since a lot of people are thinking they are run by a King already, well that makes it a whole lot easier for the executive branch to act like it is. The tea party dumbing down has backfired in a

      • As we know, there is quite a bit that the President can do without congress. As well, with the lifting of restrictions that are within the President's power, a "critical mass" for full lifting will build. Don't fool yourself, it will - and should - happen.

        As far as I know, its only the USA that has that embargo. The rest of the world enjoys the beached of Cuba in the winter, and the superb education and healthcare system. Yes, the politics there has created poverty, but it would be dreamland to think that the standard of living would jump of the USA suddenly recognized a dying regime. There are always individuals who are being groomed to take over if the Castro brothers die.

    • by bruce_the_loon ( 856617 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:14PM (#48845143) Homepage

      Then Congress should pass that law ASAP. It's ridiculous, just like a child throwing a temper tantrum.

    • by Trepidity ( 597 )

      Indeed, the parts of the sanctions that are required by law remain in effect. Congress did give the executive pretty broad discretion over parts of them, though, which is what Obama is using to modify the sanction regime (something previous presidents have also done, in both directions). Specifically the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA) [treasury.gov] authorizes exports to Cuba in certain areas, such as agriculture and medicine. The law directs the Treasury Department to come up with regula

  • Okay, okay, not "dump", but we all know there's a lot of old hardware here which would be genuinely useful someplace like Cuba, where they're not yet jaded.

    The question is, how will they have a tech revolution without an open internet?

    • by retroworks ( 652802 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:35PM (#48845281) Homepage Journal
      In fact this is exactly what should and does happen. All the phone switching gear upgraded in the USA in the 70s and 80s set up Latin America, and Africa used 90s cell phone towers (and used phones). According to Digitimes in 2006, most of the display devices sold worldwide (in units, not in dollars) were "remanufactured" CRTs purchased from EU, Japan and USA and rebuilt with analog-to-digital converter boards. And most American teenagers learn to drive in a used car. Three billion people earning $3,000 per year were the "rapidly emerging markets" of the past two decades, and they make the "secondary market" for used tech worth several billion dollars per year. What's the mystery?
    • by k6mfw ( 1182893 )

      The question is, how will they have a tech revolution without an open internet?

      I wonder if they seek advice from other countries besides US. I'm thinking of places like Bulgaria have faster internet service than most of US. Then there is the higher ups in Cuba, are they willing to delegate authority? Only big transition is from Fidel to his brother Raul. Cuba could easily do business with other countries in spite of US embargo, I heard Cuban govt is terrible at doing business with other countries.

      However, it will be interesting to see some Cubans wire up their 57 Chevy with internet

    • Maybe RMS could be sent there to head their tech revolution. Give Cubans Lemote computers loaded w/ GNewSense and all GNU applications, and have them use those for all their computing needs. In fact, create a Libre Linux derivative of GNewSense just for Cuba.

      Oh, and maybe start them off directly on IPv6, w/o even touching IPv4. The sanctions regime will then work, since the rest of the world is still mostly on IPv4, while Cuba can be on an IPv6-only network. That way, they won't be able to communicat

  • Toothpaste (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rikkards ( 98006 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:12PM (#48845133) Journal

    I think they probably want decent toothpaste more than the latest iThingie. They love getting toothpaste as tips.

    • Why? Don't they have toothpaste in Cuba? I thought they were like a medical paradise.
      • People-wise, perhaps. Supplies-wise, no.
        • People-wise, perhaps. Supplies-wise, no.

          They don't do that well people wise either. Not because Cubans are stupid. It has more to do with their isolation. Their medical textbooks are probably so old that 'leeches' might be in the index.

          I don't think they really have access to post-revolution medical knowledge. It's not like they can go to pubmed or something. Owning a personal computer has actually been illegal there until quite recently. Only prostitutes and drug dealers could afford to buy one anyway.

          And look at things from the pov of a medical

          • I don't think they really have access to post-revolution medical knowledge.

            They have. If you can read spanish, take a look at this book [rebelion.org], around page 293. If you can't read spanish, this the end of Castro's quote: "And our country adopted, in fact, the decision of abolishing intelectual property." This was decided in the context of ensuring that students and researchers had access to the literature.

            Not all cubans can afford or are allowed (embargo) to pay for modern books. But not all cubans have to: once the book is acquired, it can be photocopied legally... in fact, the governmen

    • Re:Toothpaste (Score:4, Informative)

      by Espectr0 ( 577637 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @02:05PM (#48845439) Journal

      Well, here in Venezuela we accept: USD, toothpaste, toilet paper, cooking oil, margarine/butter, diapers, coffee, sugar, flour, ketchup, shampoo, bath soap, detergent and quite a lot more, and that's with no embargo.

      • Re:Toothpaste (Score:4, Insightful)

        by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @02:13PM (#48845475) Journal
        Venezuela has shortages because of price controls. That's a well-understood economic principle.
      • Well, here in Venezuela we accept: USD, toothpaste, toilet paper, cooking oil, margarine/butter, diapers, coffee, sugar, flour, ketchup, shampoo, bath soap, detergent and quite a lot more, and that's with no embargo.

        Yep, that's the beauty of socialism. Sure makes tipping and barter easier.

        Oh wait, this is Slashdot. I should surround the word socialism with scare quotes, and act like it's crazy to believe that it even exists. Or has any negative effects.

  • Don't know why... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I don't understand why any company would line up to put their assets in Cuba where the Castro brothers will seize them like they did in 1960 to the tune of a billion dollars before the US put the embargo in place to stop it...
    • by drooling-dog ( 189103 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:59PM (#48845403)

      On the contrary, they'll be falling all over themselves to do it. We'd be talking about property rights that are granted by the existing government, rather than a previous one that was overthrown in a revolution. Property exists when a government pledges to defend your exclusive interest in something, and in general it's not guaranteed to survive a successful revolution. Or are you one of those people who thinks that property rights are granted by God?

    • I don't understand why any company would line up to put their assets in Cuba where the Castro brothers will seize them like they did in 1960 to the tune of a billion dollars before the US put the embargo in place to stop it...

      That's the sort of thing that happens when you can route profits to yourself, but loses only go to shareholders (note that is true of most of us with stock in our companies: if the company makes a ton of money, your stock becomes valuable. If the company loses a lot of money, eh, you still get your salary. Which is why the silicon-valley startup industry is full of con-artists and liars).

    • by gizmo2199 ( 458329 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @02:18PM (#48845505) Homepage

      Yeah, I'm still boggled how Western companies do business in countries like China and Vietnam, that have Communist governments. Wouldn't the government just seize all their assets?!

      Oh wait, no they don't...

    • Can the UK have its assets back the US government stole? And I'm not just talking about back in 1776.

    • by jodido ( 1052890 )
      The embargo, which followed the nationalizations, of course didn't stop anything, which is why the US finally gave up. But more important, the Cuban government offered every property owner compensation based on the owner's valuation of the property for tax purposes in the previous year. You won't be surprised to hear that no one accepted. BTW it has been illegal for many years for any US firm to accept compensation from Cuba for nationalized property.
  • Think the Cuban scene in "The Godfather" but with people watching YouTube videos of Taylor Swift as they ride around in their vintage cars.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Not very nice people. I guess they're so used to screwing each other over for the limited resources they have, it's second nature to them to screw first or be screwed.

    They're also very emotional, be prepared to deal with men more emotional than western women.

  • US Ego (Score:4, Interesting)

    by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:32PM (#48845269)

    Cuba is NOT about to make any big changes. At least not unless the man who has been busy trying to destroy this country by Executive Action decides to prop up the Communist Government at our expense. The idea that Cuba has been suffering from an isolationist policy imposed by the United States is bogus. We were (somewhat) cut off from Cuba by our government, but we are only one country. Canada and most of the rest of the world has still been trading with them. Sure, Cubans drive around old American cars from the 50's, but they keep them running and keep fueling them with imported gasoline. Other countries would be glad to sell them newer cars, it is just that when you have a communist mindset keeping the economy depressed, no one has the money to buy new modern expensive cars.

    Sure, they might sell Americans some cigars, although there has been a supply of them coming in through Canada already. They will not be selling us sugar, but not because of any real barrier. Rather because of a completely artificial barrier, Cubans who moved to Florida when Castro took power have gotten laws in place that impose such high tariffs on imported sugar that we can't import it, and we have higher prices on Sugar than the rest of the world, with all of that money going into the pockets of a few politically powerful Cubans in America who grow sugar and trickling down to the politicians they buy to keep the system in place.

    Cuba is going to see a little bump in tourism, at least while the novelty is still there, but it will not be that much or make a big impact, they already have tourism from the rest of the world and from Americans going there through Canada who show their American passports and ask that they not be stamped to avoid problems back home. We will still over pay for sugar compared to the rest of the world and have tariffs that keep us from importing it from Cuba.

    • A strategy of wide open free markets without barriers might give the people the power to effect change. Communism has, in the long run, a poor record of being favored by those with free market options. Maybe we've been going about this backwards, 'punishing' the few Communists leaders has instead hurt the populace. Launching an unending barrage of free market options might have brought those 'leaders' down more quickly.
      • Maybe we've been going about this backwards, 'punishing' the few Communists leaders has instead hurt the populace.

        Not 'maybe'. It's intentional. Collective punishment is all the rage. It is the pretext behind and the result of all sanctions. Global bullies stealing lunch money. If the US really didn't like Castro, They would have done like they did in Chile, and the rest of Central America. This is a charade.

    • Cuba is going to see a little bump in tourism, at least while the novelty is still there, but it will not be that much or make a big impact, they already have tourism from the rest of the world and from Americans going there through Canada who show their American passports and ask that they not be stamped to avoid problems back home.

      Going through Canada or Mexico, it takes longer to get to Cuba than it does to get to England. If flights go directly to Cuba, then it will be a few hour flight from New York to Cuba, something you can do in a weekend. Tourism from America will go way up, just like it was before the embargo.

      • If flights go directly to Cuba, then it will be a few hour flight from New York to Cuba, something you can do in a weekend.

        It will devastate Mexico, especially since Mexico isn't so cheap anymore.

        • Think so? Getting from California to Cuba will still be a pain. Tourists will still head there from the west coast.
          • You're right. I should have specified Caribbean side, where pretty much everybody east of the Mississippi goes because of the embargo. Puerto Vallarta and Baja won't know the difference. The Pacific is an entirely different scene anyway.

        • It will devastate Mexico, especially since Mexico isn't so cheap anymore.

          You may not be able to imagine going to Cancun for any reason other than a stopover on the way to Cuba, but believe it or not a lot of people really do vacation there. The flights are super cheap and it's warm and exotic and different from the US. With a pretty girl at my side I wouldn't mind spending some time in the Yucatan either. The food is way better than in Cuba at least.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      When I went to Cuba (I'm Canadian) years ago, they didn't even ask about the passport. Instead they had little pre cut slips of paper that they tucked in your passport and then stamped that, so when you left you could just toss the Cuban stamp. Honestly, what I'm noisy worried about for Cuba is that it will turn into a stale, de-cultured tourist trap like Mexico.

    • by dbIII ( 701233 )

      decides to prop up the Communist Government at our expense

      Why not? Republicans have been doing that by outsourcing to China haven't they? Who do you think gets most of the profits in China - little orphan Annie or Communist Party Officials?

  • by Theovon ( 109752 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @01:50PM (#48845361)

    I have some "old" computers that really aren't that old and are in fabulous condition. Is there an organization I can contact to send it to Cuba so that it ends up in the hands of people who would make good use of it (instead of one of those scams that makes it end up in a dump in China)?

    For that matter, I have other things like old clothes destined for the garage sale I could send there too. Seriously. I would feel good about sending clothes that no longer fit me (I lost weight) to people who would benefit.

    • Good question. I have 4 computers sitting up in the attic that just need peripherals. They were good enough to game on, so they'll still be just fine for email/web surfing despite their age.

    • I second the AC above [slashdot.org]. (Replying to you so you get the notification). Donate them locally. A few computers or clothes wont make much difference and will probably not reach the intended target. Trying to get Customs to release computers is not fun, even if you have all the paperwork in order. Been there, wouldn't want to do that again.

      Now, if you plan on going to Cuba and have stuff you want to give away, by all means, carry extra clothes and a laptop. Check what you can bring in without paying extra and pay

  • Previously, one could have said that Cuba's tech revolution was stifled *pending* the lifting of sanctions, but now that that obstacle has been removed, the author means to say the revolution is now impending!

    Two letters; big difference.

  • Ob (Score:4, Funny)

    by Hognoxious ( 631665 ) on Sunday January 18, 2015 @02:20PM (#48845509) Homepage Journal

    Dear Sir/Madam

    This letter is not intended to to cause any embarrassment but just to contact your esteem self-following the knowledge of your high repute and trustworthiness.

    I am Huevo Ranchero,the son of the late Cuban Rum Minister who died on the 8th of June 1998.If you are conversant with world news,you would understand better,while I got your contacts through my personal research.

    You must have heard over the media reports and the Internet on the recovery of various huge sums of money deposited by my late father in different Banks and security firms abroad.

    I shall be grateful if you could receive this fund into your Bank account for safekeeping. This arrangement is known to you and my junior brother (Abbas) only. So I will deal directly with you.I am proposing a 20% share of the fund to you for your kind assistance.I shall provide for you all the documents of the fund deposit with the security firm, and raise a power of attorney to enable you claim and receive this fund into your bank account.

    etc...

  • The entire country of Macedonia was connected in less than a year for about 2% of that $200,000,000. Through in open source cell phone infrastructure and Cuba could be pretty much fully connected quickly and cheaply - depending on what they are willing to accept for infrastructure.

    http://solutionscenter.nethope.org/case_studies/view/macedonia-connects

    http://www.wired.com/2015/01/diy-cellular-phone-networks-mexico/

  • The good news is, they're all Fortran programmers.

  • The U.S. may have had an embargo with Cuba, the rest of the world did not. Consider just Canada alone, from which Cuba could have had any technology they wished.

    So what do people imagine will change with the U.S. embargo lifted? Change has to come from Cuban leadership, if at all..

    What is very telling is that the cuban community in Florida is really, really angry we are lifting the embargo - because all it does is empower the people that made Cuba what it is today.

    • Consider just Canada alone, from which Cuba could have had any technology they wished.

      Given they haven't gotten it, I suspect it's more complex than that! Part of it may be that companies that operate in violation of U.S. embargoes cannot do business in the U.S., thus making Cuba not worth their attention might be part of it.

      Change has to come from Cuban leadership, if at all.

      Indeed, when dealing with a regime on the wrong side of an embargo or blockade, it's always the one at the bottom of the power slope

  • Maybe some nice multinationals might come in and improve life for all those poor Cubans.
    Bring them into the new millennium of corporate servitude.

    • They'd welcome it if it meant an improvement to their 50 cent per day salary. Would you bother to even show up for a shitty boring job that only paid 50 cents per 8 hour day? I don't think I would.

  • Why is it that journalists don't feel the need to check facts when they write about Cuba? Nearly everything in the article is quite demonstrably wrong. Too many utterly ridiculous ideas that simply don't apply to Cuba to debunk every one.

    The only way Cuba is going to have a tech revolution is if somehow their incomes multiply by a factor of 100 sometime soon. I suppose that *could* happen if Raul dies and their government becomes pro-capitalist. That will be huge news if it ever happens, but the end of the

    • by dablow ( 3670865 )

      You make some valid points....especially the part where Canadians are used to having the place to ourselves looool.

      Canada, Spain, Russia are also big trading partners with Cuba. It's ironic going to buy Cuban souvenirs and noticing "Made in China" stickers loool....

  • Always makes me laugh whenever I read an article about US-Cuba relations, more specifically how Americans think Cubans are...

    Been to Cuba at least 8 times now? Possibly more, don't recall.

    I can assure you Cubans have Internet access, laptops, iPads and iPhones.....

    Obviously this is more of a city and tourist area thing. The poorer farmers and villagers on the other hand might not have access to such luxuries.....However generally speaking they all seem to be familiar with the devices, their capabilities and

  • Cuba has been trading with every other country except us and none of this has happened. The U.S. is SO FULL OF ITSELF thinking it's going to make a difference....

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Working...