The bulk of the research community’s work to date has been focussed on the so-called ‘developed’ world— contexts where there are already well-established technical infrastructures and digital resources. These contexts have users who have relatively high level of computer literacy, typically have a high degree of textual literacy and have undergone a formal education. Examples include sophisticated ‘smart’ homes with digital noticeboards and even interactive fridge doors [3]; embedded technologies for amusement parks [2]; and, cities and urban dwellers with time to, ‘‘marvel at mundane everyday experiences and objects that evoke mystery, doubt, and uncertainty. How many newspapers has that person sold today? When was that bus last repaired? How far have I walked today? How many people have ever sat on that bench? Does that woman own a cat? Did a child or adult spit that gum onto the sidewalk?’’ [1]. But pervasive digital technology is no longer the preserve of the developed world. The ITU reports that in the developing world, some 68% of people have access to the cellular network [4]. Furthermore, 90% of the world’s population, and 80% of its rural population, live within range of the cellular network. Therefore, there are hundreds of millions of users, and billions to come in the next 5 years, in places like India, China, and Africa, whose first, and perhaps only, experience of computing will be in the form of mobile and other ubicomp technologies. This Theme Issue is about the billions of people who previously lay outside the domain of digital technology. Take Sambasivan et al.’s contribution, for instance. It examines how technology is diffusing through resourcepoor groups in the urban slums of India. In particular, they examine how the constraints built into the technologies are overcome, as these new users come to understand the technology and appropriate it for their situations. And it is not just ‘developing’ countries. What about those who were previously marginalised in our ‘developed’ world—the urban poor, the ill-educated, the homeless, the computer non-literate; i.e., those without access to what many of us take as essential digital infrastructure? Woelfer and Hendry’s paper, then, looks at the types of digital systems required to support young homeless people in Seattle, WA; a city that is one of the homes of digital innovation globally, yet through this work, we see many of its citizens have hitherto been bypassed by digital progress. Many of these users will never live in the sorts of home, or work in the types of office, or daydream in the parks, or take a day-off for the sorts of amusement park envisaged by earlier ubicomp research. A new discipline, currently called HCI4D, is trying to re-imagine how we conduct user research for these new communities of users. As this research grows, we find that we have to reconsider the methods we have held dear and challenge the assumptions that underlie them—for example, how does one do participatory design with someone who has never seen a computer interface before? Putnam et al. tackle this issue in their contribution, seeking to find methods appropriate for creating designs for these new groups of users. In her G. Marsden ICT4D Centre, University Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa e-mail: gaz@acm.org