One Laptop Per Child and Intel Join Forces

dan the person writes "A Wired piece informs us that Intel and the OLPC project have put their bickering behind them. They have joined forces to ensure 'the maximum number of laptops will reach children'. '"What happened in the past has happened," said Will Swope of Intel. "But going forward, this allows the two organisations to go do a better job and have better impact for what we are both very eager to do which is help kids around the world." "Intel joins the OLPC board as a world leader in technology, helping reach the world's children. Collaboration with Intel means that the maximum number of laptops will reach children," said Nicholas Negroponte, founder of One Laptop per Child. The new agreement means that Intel will sit alongside companies such as Google and Red Hat as partners in the OLPC scheme.'"

Comments

So i guess

[Anonymous Coward]

that AMD processor won't last long in the OLPC machines ...

Re:So i guess

[Anne_Nonymous]

No, OLPC and Intel are simply joining forces to create the new Soylent processor - One Child Inside(TM).

Does that mean US parents can buy them now?

[bADlOGIN]

Before the US becomes a 3rd world country due to competition from
India and China who can get the OLPC Laptop in special deals to
make their next generation of children more competitive?

Re:Does that mean US parents can buy them now?

[Reality Master 101]

Before the US becomes a 3rd world country due to competition from India and China who can get the OLPC Laptop in special deals to make their next generation of children more competitive?

I've seen two examples of schools in my local neighborhood bragging about how their gifted fifth-grade students were using Powerpoint to give their school reports. In one case, I saw an example of it with all sort of pictures, and the GATE teacher bragged, "and one report had a video on it!!"

Of course, I'm thinking how pathetically easy it is to put together this sort of presentation, and I was struck not by the content (as I should), but by how much the teacher valued the flash over the substance of the report.

If we want to make our children more "competitive", maybe it would be a better idea to keep computers away from them as long as possible. Any idiot can learn to use a computer. I'd rather end up with educated children.

Re:Does that mean US parents can buy them now?

[mrchaotica]

I've seen two examples of schools in my local neighborhood bragging about how their gifted fifth-grade students were using Powerpoint to give their school reports. In one case, I saw an example of it with all sort of pictures, and the GATE teacher bragged, "and one report had a video on it!!" Of course, I'm thinking how pathetically easy it is to put together this sort of presentation, and I was struck not by the content (as I should), but by how much the teacher valued the flash over the substance of the report.

You know what the worst part is? This is actually a regression from what we had 15 years ago when I was in 5th grade!

Back then, we had Hypercard -- like PowerPoint, except programmable. Not only could we have embedded videos in our stacks (if sufficiently fast machines had been available, anyway), but we could also program animations, link together our cards/slides in non-linear ways, and even build applications with it.

Between Hypercard, LOGO, and games like Number Munchers and Oregon Trail, computers were better used for education back then than they are today!

does this mean...

[shutupkevin]

that we're going to have a lot more children discovering internet porn sooner? :O I can just imagine the next generation of kids.

Cost cutting measure?

[slapout]

OLPC guy #1: Looks like we're not going to be able to make this thing for $150. How are we going to get costs down?

OLPC guy #2: Guess it's time to sell some more ad-space. Where are we on the phone list?

OLPC guy #1: Looks like we're doing to the "I"s.

OLPC guy #2: Start dialing.

Easy solution

[aztec rain god]

Two laptops per child!

LinuxBIOS and Open Specifications for Intel?

[billybob2]

One of the key requirements for the OLPC is that all the components are open source (even the firmware for the wireless component). AMD has worked very hard to make the OLPC compatible with LinuxBIOS and OpenFirmware, which are 100% Free/Open Source. I certainly hope Intel will do the same.

Re:Three possible scenarios...

[mrchaotica]

...just so it can run vista as by the time like the OLPC v2 comes out XP will be not sold any more.

If the XO ran Windows -- any version -- it would be worse than useless for the purpose of the OLPC. The whole point is to have software designed for education, wrapped in an operating system that's completely user-modifiable (to encourage the students to creatively hack it). This is fundamentally incompatible with Windows.

Re:Waits to be flamed

[pauljlucas]

... it's a waste of money compared to better causes like ... FEEDING or MEDICINE ...

When the choice is cast as black-and-white as "Laptop or food/medicine?", I'd bet most people would choose the latter -- it's a no-brainer. The problem is that the problem isn't so simple and casting the problem to be so is somewhat disingenuous.

You have to remember that philanthropy is often done by people with passion. Nicholas Negroponte was the co-founder of the MIT Media Laboratory, so naturally he's passionate about computers. One thing about the nature of passion is that one who is passionate wants to instill the same passion in others. Negroponte has passion about computers (and money, which definitely helps), so let him express his philanthropy as he wants. So perhaps the question shouldn't be, "Why isn't Negroponte giving food and medicine?" but rather "Why isn't there some other rich philanthropist who is passionate about feeding kids and making sure they have decent medical care?" There's no shortage of rich men.

Also, let's face it: giving food and medicine (a) just isn't sexy to the press and so doesn't garner support easily and (b) giving food and medicine is a never-ending job. Unlike giving a kids a laptop, you have to feed them three times a day every day. Even the most passionate philanthropist would likely burn out.

Another thing you need to consider is the potential for kids to rise above their situation. Feeding kids just makes them not hungry; the results of giving kids access to the internet is unknown buy potentially unbounded.

Consider what was done in Born into Brothels: poor children of prostitutes were given cameras. Could the kids have used more/better food/medicine? Of course. But what resulted from the cameras was (a) art and, for a few children, (b) a way out of their bleak station in life from their art and notoriety is garnered. As useful as food and medicine might be, it offers no hope of escaping their bleak lives. Who knows what kids might accomplish with laptops? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?