> Let's keep in mind that most people don't have access to basic hygiene and food safety.
Not to be pedantic, but since another comment questioned that, the numbers for 2020:
> 3.6 billion people lacked safely managed services, including 1.9 billion people with basic services, 580 million with limited services, 616 million using unimproved facilities, and 494 million practising open defecation.
To be clear: I don't care whether this is technically "most people", it is far too many people lacking decent sanitation.
(edit: fix wrong negation in last sentence).
> Let's keep in mind that most people don't have access to basic hygiene and food safety.
I've had a website since I was in my early teens and throughout most of my career as a programmer, 20+ years.
In 2018 I became homeless in SF and still had some websites for the first couple years where I started posting stuff about being homeless. When I lack basics like hygiene and safe food is when I've felt having a website would do the most good.
I've been pretty vocal about being homeless and it's taken over my social media channels, but you can bet the content isn't surfaced much or to people who I knew in real life who might've cared or helped me out if they knew sooner. If my RSS feed wasn't dead, who knows?
Even $5/mo or $10 for a domain renewal is too much most months, lacking said and similar resources. I've not had phone service in a year, phone in need of repair and now lost to forced migration due to domestic violence. I'm aware of Obama phone but I'm also aware of spyware, data privacy and similar and have done the math--no thanks.
Not a happy story at all (I feel joy and peaceful, personally). Makes most people feel super bad. Not feeling like a victim either... I totally understand why mainstream sites don't surface real content that I post. I still post it, but having my own website with a feed or forum now of all times would be superior. Especially when I have to hold my tongue about various topics that fall too far outside of community guidelines / algorithmic fairness and could get my account suspended.
Long winded I know, just underlining that people without basic hygiene or safe food may be perfectly capable of running a web site and even custom apps with novel features, and may need to have a voice more than anyone or ever. There are mainstream options but most here can probably get behind the idea of running one's own services and owning the registration.
A solution I've had in mind is libraries running decades-long hosting services attached to member cards. Various people have expressed a little interest but I've not been persistent in following up or pushing anything forward myself. Lack of stability makes me come off as really flaky and poor at communication online and more--and look like an excuse maker for expressing such things.
There's 7.8 billion people in the world, so 3.6 billion qualifies as "most".
It's also worth noting we're in a global food crisis which started in 2020 and got worse in 2021. It continues to grow year over year. Ukraine and Russia were also the two biggest cereal providers, which apparently has affected these numbers significantly. That's just food safety though, for nutrition the numbers are worse.
In the end, however, it hardly matters whether it is 46% or 51% percent. The exact wording by the GP may have been inaccurate, but the numbers support the underlying point: sanitation very far from universally accessible.
Also keep in mind that these numbers are based on estimations and definitions that give some room for interpretations, so they cannot be 100% accurate either.
> Regardless how does 3.6:7.8 ie 46% constitute a majority? Most is a word. Words have meaning.
Graciously, they are off by a few percent. Parsing words does not diminish the magnitude. The issue still stands. A large enough portion of the worlds problems dwarf the initiative to give everyone a webpage/domain. It's silly enough to discount.
Trying to make some separate point about parsed words (you really left the subject behind for some reason), in this case, is not a compelling argument against the assertion. I phrased it in a more amicable form (the way it was obviously intended to be communicated) and another random person, takes up with minutia. Good luck with that.
Not to be pedantic, but since another comment questioned that, the numbers for 2020:
> 3.6 billion people lacked safely managed services, including 1.9 billion people with basic services, 580 million with limited services, 616 million using unimproved facilities, and 494 million practising open defecation.
Source: https://washdata.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/jmp-2021-wa...
To be clear: I don't care whether this is technically "most people", it is far too many people lacking decent sanitation. (edit: fix wrong negation in last sentence).