James v. Compaine

James criticizes Compaine, on page 55, for assuming that the digital divide will close on its own.  James is not convinced that the digital divide will close just because the divides of the past have.  Compaine could reply to James by saying that the probability that the digital divide will close is greater than the probability that the digital divide will remain a large gap.  Looking at past technologies we see that the gap has closed.  There is not evidence of older technologies the retained a large gap.  Although we can not say with absolute certainty that the digital divide will close on its own, we can say based on past evidence that there is a good chance it will.

James also criticizes Compaine by saying that "affordability is just one such factor" (57).  Users not only need to have affordable technology, but they also need to have literacy of the device.  Compaine could argue that literacy is consequence of affordable technology.  Once the price of technology goes down there will be a larger quantity demanded of that device.  When there are more devices in the market, then the demand for computer literacy materials will increase, and companies will be encouraged to help out users.