I dunno, saying they don't have a use for a computer seems incorrect to me, even in the poorest parts of the world today, a substantial minority have acquired their own computer that's cheap, small, efficient, has a built in long distance radio, can run arbitrary software, doesn't require reliable electricity (I mean cell phones)
obviously it's a different technological and economic today compared to 2005, but still, "the global poor don't need computers" is questionable just based on the fact that they are spending their own money to get them
it's very easy to verge into OLPC type thinking with this, you probably should just give them normal bikes instead of trying to come up with some bespoke DIY-able system
if we had a standardized way to deliver packages like we do mail (the heavily regulated mailbox!) this would not be a problem, it's a phenomenal waste of human effort to navigate this uniquely for every location
it's not like a doorman where there's useful social interaction
I think licensing anything from wacom or samsung is a big ask for a two person(?) project that's making a very small run of open source/open hardware devices
what a wild comparison, millions (billions?) of humans have died from food-borne disease, and yet we do in fact still let people very casually sell food to the public (even unpasteurized milk in the US)
considering this is a review aggregating a bunch of small n studies from before we acknowledged the replication crisis in psychology, I'm going with "no"