Slashdot Mirror


Dvorak Slams OLPC As 'Naive Fiasco'

theodp writes "PC Magazine's John C. Dvorak has a unique take on the cute One Laptop per Child XO-1, deeming the OLPC project a naive fiasco waiting to unfold that sends an insulting 'let them eat cake' message to the world's poor. When it comes down to a choice of providing African kids living in absolute poverty with access to Slashdot or a $200 truckload of rice, Dvorak votes for the latter. Buy ten OLPCs if it assuages your guilt, says Dvorak, but 'I'll donate my money to hunger relief.'"

72 of 740 comments (clear)

  1. New section by HandsOnFire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have space, hardware, your rights online, apple, etc...

    Can we have a john dvorak section so I have a shot at filtering out all his crap?

    1. Re:New section by eddy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't think giving him that much attention would be good, but how about one section for just "Some Analcyst says.." stories? That would be great.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    2. Re:New section by celle · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just filter out Zonk and Kdawson. Judging from the summaries they give I wonder if either one of them made it out of high school.

    3. Re:New section by Hockney+Twang · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have a solution. If you use the Greasemonkey Firefox extension or Opera userscripts, load up this little guy: http://parksideninjas.com/greasemonkey/antidvorakscript.user.js

      Will remove any story with a summary containing the word "Dvorak".

    4. Re:New section by spvo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Since your reading a dvorak article, its obviously not too effective :P

    5. Re:New section by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here's how Dvorak works.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    6. Re:New section by Xyrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Give a man a fish, and he eats for day. Teach a man to phish, and he eats for the rest of his life.

      All joking aside, $200 of rice will feed them sure enough. But that is merely treating the symptom. It always has.

      Indeed, it seems a lot of the times that's what happens. People see a problem but they don't fix it. Instead they treat the symptoms of the problem.

      Now why would that be? The answer is, of course, profit. There is far more money to be made from treating symptoms than solving problems. Just look at the government. We've got the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and let's not forget our most recent addition to the family, the war on terror. All of which were started with good intentions (the road to hell and all that), but not a single one of them address the underlying problems.

      The OLPC project is actually a step in the right direction. Helping people help themselves works out a lot better than providing a constant crutch that people grow reliant on.

      And that, Mr. Dvorak, is the problem with $200 dollars worth of rice. When it runs out, they'll need $200 more. That doesn't fix the problem, it only temporarily addresses the symptom.

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    7. Re:New section by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Where's the profit in giving things to people who need them, as opposed to educating them to be self-sufficient and hence more likely to buy things later?

      Somebody needs to pay for all that rice. But here's a hint: it's not the rice farmers, and it's not the agencies managing the distribution. Instead, they're all getting paid. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out who's getting the shaft.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    8. Re:New section by random0xff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No no no, that's not the problem with his argument. I think it's a straw man, is that the correct term? You see, he says that it's either food or a laptop, but that's wrong. To illustrate this: there has been a deal for laptops in Mexico, now I don't know if John Dvorak is sending money for rice to Mexico, but my guess is no he doesn't, nobody does. Same for India, or any other country where kids have enough to eat, and even get good education. These kids just don't have the means to get a computer and thus are missing out on a) the information highway and b) job opportunities in IT.

    9. Re:New section by Gription · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You give them $200 worth of food and once they eat it what do they have besides an open mouth needing another $200 worth of food?

      If you give them tools to become productive and relevant you have the possibility that they might get the next $200 worth of food themselves.
      "Teach a man to fish..."

  2. he's got a point. by yagu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's a hard point to argue if you had only two options, food, or a laptop, the food seems a better choice. Of course there's no reason it can't be both. I think his point is worth thinking on, there are people for whom getting a computer is not much more than some diversion before they die of whatever disease they're slated to die from if they're lucky enough not to die of starvation (or unlucky enough, pick your idealogical slant).

    True that no matter how much money you send, it's never going to be enough, but also true, for the lucky ones if they manage to survive their poverty, exposure to something like a computer may offer them a starting point.

    He also raises good points... computers are hardly more than advertising pipelines, and unless you're already savvy, it's hard to suppress an rid the experience of the deluge of ads. Also, how many sites are in SiSwati or isiZulu these days?

    Heck, I've seen and read of schools investing millions in computers with no tangible results in students' scores, grades, or even elevated interests in learning. The big problem is actually teaching something at all, ever, no matter the tools selected for education.

    Yeah, sometimes Dvorak's nothing more than a grumpy old man who rants. I see him in this article as a grumpy old thoughtful and compassionate man. Kudos to him for raising the issue.

    1. Re:he's got a point. by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know, there are lots(like tens of millions) of people that get enough to eat most of the time, but still live in poverty. These laptops give them the opportunity to learn, and to share good ideas amongst themselves, ideas that may help them run their farm at a greater profit, or save time and labor.

      One thing is sure, it wouldn't work if no one bothered trying.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:he's got a point. by shawb · · Score: 5, Funny

      Give a man a fish, and he can eat for a day.

      Teach a man how to 419 and he can fish for a lifetime.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    3. Re:he's got a point. by Znork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Of course there's no reason it can't be both."

      Considering that the OLPC isnt intended for demographics who have no food, people like Dvorak would be that reason...

      There's a large and emerging segment of 'semi-poor people' who have food and most other necessities, but for whom educational material is a significant cost. One of the main points of the OLPC is to cut educational material costs while creating a load of other capabilities.

      Personally I think the OLPC is already a huge success; I'd attribute the interest in it as a large part of the driving force for low-cost laptops such as ASUS Eee.

      "Yeah, sometimes Dvorak's nothing more than a grumpy old man who rants."

      Yeah, well, no different this time.

    4. Re:he's got a point. by packeteer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think hunger relief is often the the far less useful money that gets rid of guilt. Somehow people think if someone is not literally starving they don't deserve their help.

      Yes people are still starving but it is less than it has been before and the reason for hunger is almost always political, economic, or weather related. Much of the human reasons for keeping people hungry are dealt with when you educate and empower the population.

      I don't think it is fair to consider people who have enough to eat often by subsistence farming to be too rich for our aid. This laptop plan may or may not be the best way but it is far from useless or harmful. I guess we will find out soon enough.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    5. Re:he's got a point. by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He also raises good points... computers are hardly more than advertising pipelines, and unless you're already savvy, it's hard to suppress an rid the experience of the deluge of ads. Also, how many sites are in SiSwati or isiZulu these days?

      That is bullshit. The OLPC project includes Squeak, a Smalltalk programming language, and has simple sensor and control devices available that can be used to have Squeak programs interact with the real world. A child who can program in Squeak grows into an adult who can solve problems, think logically, develop and use technology and compete globally. I've been guiding my 7 year old in it, and she's already made her first object oriented game, so clearly, it's suitable for the task.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    6. Re:he's got a point. by Gossi · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've got a question. Does everybody on Slashdot believe that all of Africa is starving babies with flies covering their mouths? That's a serious question, by the way. Because whilst there are certainly places where that is still happening and it's terrible, there's a fuck of a lot of places where it isn't like that.

    7. Re:he's got a point. by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a hard point to argue if you had only two options, food, or a laptop, the food seems a better choice.

      I seem to have missed this memo; I wasn't aware that the OLPC project was aiming its materials at the type of children who appeared in 1980s benefit concert videos, or that the population of the developed world was nothing but an utter monolith of absolute poverty.

      Then again, this is Slashdot, which is utterly incapable of discussing the developing world as anything other than a straw man parody of itself...

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    8. Re:he's got a point. by markov_chain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You miss the point of the OLPC. It is NOT intended to be yet another 'throw computers at schools' project. OLPCs are not intended to run your Powerpoint. The biggest innovation of OLPC is not the hardware, it is in fact the open, education-oriented software stack. There is a key on the keyboard specifically set aside to switch to source code editing of the running application; think on that for a while and realize what kind of philosophy and corporate culture is needed to support such a deceptively simple feature. No other vendor on the planet can come close; all they are interested in is expanding mind share and pushing yet another office machine.

      I can relate to the attractiveness of the project from my own sour process of growing up under the MS umbrella. The defining experience installing every new version of DOS and Windows is a short-lived sense of accomplishment at having a clean, new, working installation followed by an empty feeling of betrayal at the inability to do much with the system, the useful bits being locked down behind undocumented APIs and binaries. The ensuing months would be filled with waiting for next issues of random computer magazines, grasping at crumbs of knowledge some two-bit writer would be merciful enough to publish. An issue describing video card registers would keep me going for a year. How much more would I have learned with an open, documentation-filled machine like the XO? If on top of this it contained encyclopaedic information about building stuff it would be a dream.

      About the food thing, can you explain how local farmers can get established if they can't sell their produce at a profit because they are being undercut by free food? Do you suggest to keep the free food flowing forever?

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    9. Re:he's got a point. by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes people are still starving but it is less than it has been before and the reason for hunger is almost always political, economic, or weather related. Much of the human reasons for keeping people hungry are dealt with when you educate and empower the population.

      Today I'd even knock out the 'weather related'. The USA produces enough food by itself to feed the world, much of the problem of starving people is transportation - and politics blocking the transportation.

      It's very much a 'give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him how to fish and he eats for life'.

      Provide a subsidence farmer, even in the form of loans, a tractor, miscellaneous equipment and supplies, and the training how to use it and you'll have somebody who isn't a subsidence farmer anymore. He can produce enough food to pay off his loans as well as free up hundreds of other subsidence farmers to do things like work in the tractor/fertilizer factories, bicycle factories, and everything else that a developed economy needs.

      With food aid I've seen unfortunate consequences: Local farmers are driven out of business*, women continue to have babies, and you end up with a population explosion of people who still can't take care of themselves. IE the food aid makes the problem *worse*. In at least one case very much worse - the food aid allowed a warlord to continue his campaign against the farmers who's farms he'd been burning.

      I'd much rather concentrate on enabling people to take care of themselves. Provide equipment, training, and the security needed for them to work if necessary**.

      Unfortunately, this is at least one order of magnitude more expensive than simply providing food. I'm of the opinion that it'd be better to do this, even if you can't feed everybody as a result of the diverted resources. The idea is that after doing this for ten years you don't need to provide food aid anymore except for short term disasters like a tsunami. Unlike current situations like with locations in Africa - which has needed food aid for decades.

      *US product can easily be superior than what a 3rd world farmer can produce, and you can't beat 'free'.
      **Like the current situation in the middle east, work on training up and equipping local defense forces, both military and police. That way you don't have to provide security forever.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    10. Re:he's got a point. by IAR80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think we are to much entrenched in our superiority feeling towards African people, evidently a reminiscence from the "good old" colonialism time, that we deem them inferior and unable to do anything for themselves. In the 19th century we wanted to "civilize" them and now we just throw them scraps from the table to feed their starving children. The situation they are in is a clear result of colonialism and economic neoclonialism for which we are directly responsible. Giving them a bowl of rice to survive until tomorrow is not going to solve the problem. Helping them to build sustainable economies will probably do it. The laptop for child is a long shot but it might break the vicious circle they are in by creating a better educated new generation that will refuse to work in the diamond mines for 1$ a day so that some f.... Belgian company gets filthy rich. I guess that is "our" greatest fear! That someday they won't be dependent on us and IMF and their natural resources won't be open for plunder. I hope that day comes sooner!

      --
      http://ebgp.net/ccc/
    11. Re:he's got a point. by cmacb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Does everybody on Slashdot believe that all of Africa is starving babies with flies covering their mouths?


      Not everybody, but quite possibly a majority, as our attention deficit culture certainly overwhelms us with such images, failing to supply much in the way of background information.

      Dvorak has taken the classic straw-man approach of defining OLPC as something that it is not, and then using unassailable logic to point out how that thing which it is not is a very stupid idea. Add to that the fact that he doesn't make a single suggestion about alternative strategies, but simply says that this (mischaracterized) idea is dumb.

      It would be bad enough if he is doing this just to get hits (a strategy he jokingly admits to), it's downright frightening to think that an industry "legend" might actually think this way. I've been on board with some of his windmill tilting of the past, but this makes me wonder whether I'd ever want to waste the time on him again.

      Had I not canceled my subscriptions to such publications long ago I sure would consider it now.
    12. Re:he's got a point. by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, because dumping food on those who have no food doesn't help them have food in the future, it just undercuts all their farmers and builds a long-term dependent relationship. (There are exceptions, one that comes to mind is drought-caused-famine relief).

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    13. Re:he's got a point. by Bombula · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The OLPC issue is an interesting one on slashdot because it lays bare the cultural and economic myopia of the geek culture - however smart we may be. The fact that this time the article is being raised by an incendiary pundit is just fuel for the fire, and Dvorak's own pithy quips about sending food instead of laptops is just more of the same geek myopia coming from the other end of the spectrum. Of course sending food only alleviates symptoms and doesn't solve underlying problems, and of course food relief must be temporary because if permanent it would negate the possibility of creating viable food economies. If Dvorak doesn't know this, then he's an ignorant fool, but that is far more charitable than assuming he does know this, in which case he is a malicious bastard.

      I'm merely a hobbyist geek. But I AM a professional sustainable economic development consult who has spent twenty years living and working in developing countries. In my opinion, the OIRP is not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination, but it is not the ideal use of resources either. At best, it is an important part of the total socioeconomic development package that must be deployed in order to alleviate the plight of penury and destitution that is the lot of hundreds of millions of children living in developing countries around the world. Are there more important individual components within that package? Yes. Access to potable water is more important than access to information. Access to food is more important (although as many posters have pointed out, it is not the biggest problem). Access to electricity is more important. Access to transportation is more important. And, of course, security and health are more important. But does that mean that access to information is unimportant? Of course not.

      It may be that the hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of man-years put into the development of this project could not possibly have been better spent address one of the more critical issues I just mentioned. I honestly don't know. What I do know is that the always-hyperbolic nature of the discussion on slashdot shows that the vast majority of readers are not well enough informed about issues of international development to legitimately engage in reasonable and nuanced debate on the subject.

      --
      A-Bomb
    14. Re:he's got a point. by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Funny
      Give a man a fish, and he can eat for a day.

      Teach a man to fish, and he can sit in a boat drinking beer for a lifetime.

      rj

    15. Re:he's got a point. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think there are two main reasons, and Firethorn (above) describes one of them well -- namely, that people just don't want to trust the market when it comes to eating versus starving, and happily pay for supply security -- the other is geopolitical. Even more than oil or manufactured goods, when you start importing your food you export your ability to bargain aggressively with the countries that you depend on to eat.

      A country (and perhaps more importantly, a government) can survive with its supply of petroleum shut off for a short time, although the results may not be fun. Natural gas in areas where it's widely used for heating are worse, but again tolerable for a while, although it may result in people torching their furniture. Food, though ... cut off a country's food long enough to empty out what's left in the distribution pipeline (which is very short for some staples, compared to manufactured goods with a long shelf life) and things can get very ugly. In the average house I suspect you'd run out of things to eat long before you'd run out of things to burn to keep from freezing.

      We've seen the panic Russia caused when it toyed with the idea of using its natural gas supplies to Europe for political ends -- imagine if a country was as dependent on a single source for food as many are for gas: they'd hardly be able to call themselves independent. Introduce a few 'unfortunate delays' into the shipments, and in a few weeks the government would more than likely be toppled. People like to eat.

      And that's the elephant in the room when it comes to agricultural subsidies. We may have a very interconnected world, but when you get right down to our most bas(e|ic) natures, countries tend to shy away from making themselves so clearly subservient to other nations.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  3. This confirms it by Jooly+Rodney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, I was a little nervous about giving them money, but now that I know Dvorak's against it, I'm convinced it was the right thing to do.

  4. Hmmm. Let see by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slams Linux in 94 and says that it will never go anywhere ESP. on servers. Says that it will never replace unix (took ray norda to task for letting go of Unix and moving to Linux). IIRC, said that SCO was dead on WRT Linux stealing code from Unix. So on, and so on.

    I long ago quit reading him, because he long ago became worthless.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Hmmm. Let see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      He also thought mice would never take off.

      Quote:

      "The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse.' There is no evidence that people want to use these things."

    2. Re:Hmmm. Let see by Tomy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Going back even further, I read an article of his in the DOS days where he said the average user didn't need multitasking. Around the same time he complained about TSR's not playing well together.

      I wish he'd give stock tips. I could short whatever stock he recommended and make a fortune.

  5. Give them fish... by renesch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but above all don't teach them how to fish!

    1. Re:Give them fish... by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Light a man a fire and you'll keep him warm for a night; light a man afire and you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life."

      [Some random /. sig]

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  6. Dictators like to steal by danbert8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rice can be stolen and then resold on an international market for money. I was under the impression that XOs could only be used in a certain area or they'd be useless. So the real question is, would you rather give $200 of rice to a dictator that the people will never see, or try and get them a machine that can help spread education and freedom to peoples all over the world?

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
  7. That's not unique. by mabinogi · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's not a unique take, that's the same old tired objections that we've been hearing since the project started.
    The XO is not intended to go to children who can't afford food. How dense can some people be?

    Oh wait - it's Dvorak, silly question.

    --
    Advanced users are users too!
  8. I think he's missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Looks like Dvorak--as many others--are totally missing the point of the OLPC program. It's not for places where people are starving to death. It's for places where kids are able to go to school and get some education. The OLPC program is designed to get kids in developing countries access to technology where they otherwise wouldn't have it.

    Not all third-world countries are starving to death. Quite a number have the basic needs covered, but they need effective education, and the OLPC program aims to supplement that education.

    1. Re:I think he's missing the point by Matt+Perry · · Score: 4, Informative

      Looks like Dvorak--as many others--are totally missing the point of the OLPC program.
      Dvorak isn't missing the point. He's trolling for ad dollars. He admits as much. Don't click on the link and feed the troll. Nothing to see here, just move along.
      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  9. A free truckload of rice destroys their farmers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...a free laptop destroys their pc hardware industry. ;-)

  10. give a man a fish... by fyoder · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... and he will eat for a day. Show him how to monetize his web site with google ads, and he can go to the market and buy fish with the money he makes.

    --
    Loose lips lose spit.
  11. BRILLIANT! by lakeland · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After all, can you think of a single project Dvorak has claimed as a failure that didn't succeed spectacularly? His criticism is a strong hint that OLPC is no longer a niche player and is about to make major inroads.

    On a more insidious note, Dvorak is an analyst-for-hire. He only comes out with an opinion when somebody pays him to have that opinion. That means one of the big players has decided they want bad PR about OLPC. I wonder if it was Microsoft, Intel, or somebody else?

  12. Why does someone pay this guy? by sayfawa · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've heard some dumb shit from this guy before but this breaks the mold. That rant wasn't even worthy of one of the AC trolls around here.

    How many times has it been said over and over and over again: the OLPC is not for the starving countries with the distended bellies and flies in the eyes. They are for countries that have generally good health and food but just aren't rich enough to provide computers for their students. It would have taken about one freaking minute for him to find that out. Instead he lets us know (again) what an ass he is.

    --
    Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
  13. Leave it to Dvorak to see a half empty glass by Torodung · · Score: 4, Insightful

    True to the linked article, my first thought about the OLPC project was that all it would do is show the have-nots just how much they don't have. I figured it was more likely to spur a violent, lower-class revolution than anything else. I was thinking about 18th century France at the time.

    Can you imagine how someone with starving children would feel when they Wikied "Turducken?" It'd be like Marie Antoinette with a megaphone and a team of Solid Gold dancers.

    But I also believe that technology is a need, in a technological world, and that it empowers people. I doubt this project can assuage the global poverty and resource distribution fiasco, nor was that the intent, but it may allow a new generation to help themselves.

    These laptops can bring them something of value: hope. Hope tastes awful, and it needs salt, which many of the project's beneficiaries can't afford, but it's absolutely better than nothing at all.

    I know this is a bit redundant, but I wanted to express Dvorak's point without all the bombast and condemnation. We're sorry you're a guilty white man, John. We're not getting on that bus.

    I'm sure the OLPC is a good thing, and I know the people who buy them are doing a good thing, but I often wonder if our priorities are in the right order.

    Because Dvorak is ultimately wrong. Technology, in whatever form, will absolutely change the world. I just wonder if it will be for the better.

    --
    Toro

  14. Buy a man a fish. by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Buy ten OLPCs if it assuages your guilt, says Dvorak, but 'I'll donate my money to hunger relief.' Buy a man a fish, he eats for a day.

    Teach a child to use a computer, he gets to work in a call center for a lifetime.

    Seriously though, food aid achieves...? It pretty much ensures poor kids live long enough to breed and make even more poorer kids. You pat yourself on the back for having saved a kid today and create five that starve tomorrow.

    Given the choice, I'd rather give those kids a chance at an education so they can raise their standard of life and start trying to ensure their kids, grandkids and every generation afterwards is lifted out of a situation where they need food aid year after year to support too large numbers on poorly cultivated land.

    Call me mercenary but, tough as it is, I'd rather a million kids starve while the million that survive improve their quality of life and for the generations to come than save both million now and have ten million starving within a couple of generations.

    In this case, Dvorak's self congratulating his short term compassion while creating a far worse long term problem and knocking those who're trying to do the opposite.
  15. I'm critical of OLPC, but... by erikharrison · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have some criticism here and there of OLPC, and I wonder if it will ever achieve what it hopes to achieve.

    That said, I find Dvorak's comments to be horrifically offensive. The ignorance and pretension with which he is critical of OLPC and, by extension, any project that does anything other than ship limited, non renewable resources to countries where it can be stolen by corrupt bureaucrats is frankly disgusting. And the assumptions underneath! That you'll only ever make a one time charitable donation to a third world country in your life! If I didn't know that Dvorak was doing this only to be contrary, I'd say that his rhetoric belied someone who had never deeply considered the problem in third world nations before writing the damn article.

    The truth is that third world countries desperately need infrastructure and education. They'll never be able to compete in the world wide industrial market, even if they have natural resources, but given sufficient education they can compete in the world information market. Is Dvorak really so short sighted as to not see that? Kids who grow up with computers can become information workers, and that requires no more infrastructure than a cheap laptop and bandwidth. But apparently that's a long term investment that Dvorak can't see - though I doubt he would be so critical of a similar education initiative in the US, which already has established resources in computer education. How hypocritical.

    And there is more - a single laptop can service a large number of children, technology like the XO-1 that could let kids onto the internet can foster a generation supportive and understanding of democracy and free markets without growing up in one. I could go on and on (for example, that the nations themselves are sometimes purchasing these laptops), but I think around here I'd be preaching to the choir.

    So, sure, if you're only ever going to spend $200 dollars in charitable donations in your lifetime, spend it on food for starving kids. If you don't mind giving a little more then consider investing in the future of these children, rather than just hemorrhaging money into life support and hoping the situation gets better on its own.

  16. Hunger is a distribution problem by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's plenty of food in the world. The issue is one of distribution, not lack of ability to grow it. Typically hunger and poverty go hand in hand with war and social inequalities. If you look at the Global Hunger Map (requires Google Earth), you'll see hunger is worst in the Middle East, central Africa, and parts of India. Sending rice or laptops to those places will help little until they can establish safety and equality.

    1. Re:Hunger is a distribution problem by orkysoft · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The OLPCs won't get into the hands of people under an oppressive government, because oppressive governments won't buy them for the people they are trying to starve.

      The OLPCs are for people in developing countries who have governments that are trying to improve their people's conditions, and have already solved the immediate food problems, and are now moving onto problems like lack of education, health, and wealth.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    2. Re:Hunger is a distribution problem by starfishsystems · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm glad to see someone make this point.

      It's an open question at the moment whether the movement of bits between people in chronic poverty has sufficient power to transform the conditions leading to that poverty. But inasmuch as other attempted solutions over several decades haven't really done much to change those conditions, perhaps it would be better not to be too cynical about this one. We've seen how Japan, after the war, or China and India more recently, have made quantum leaps in their economic stature by virtue of starting with a clean slate. It may well turn out that what's been holding back the Third World is nothing more than the means to organize itself and thereby release its creative potential.

      Dvorak, never a man to pursue great subtlety of thought, seems to have reached only for the obvious. His point is valid, but hardly remarkable. I like yours better.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
  17. The press overlooks the purpose of the machine by Eric+Smith · · Score: 3, Informative

    The point isn't that the world's poor need computers or that they need to be on the internet. The point is that they need better education. Currently a major cost of education is textbooks. The OLPC is intended, in combination with suitable content, to replace printed textbooks. The cost of an OLPC, even at US$188, is less than the cost of printed textbooks a child needs for five years of school. By providing the children with OLPCs, it should be possible to give them a better education while saving money.

  18. Re:Who is Dvorak? by mollymoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    John C Dvorak is a notorious professional troll. His MO is to post something which is carefully designed so it will be interpreted as highly inflammatory (like this story), but he's always careful to give himself a plausible "out" by never being absolute or explicit, so he can later claim he was misinterpreted. If you read this article, you'll see all the hallmarks - he never actually says that computers for the third world are a bad idea, or that education isn't better than food relief. He just wants people to think that's what he's saying because it's controversial and gets the hits.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  19. Timing with other OLPC stories by phrostie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    did anyone else notice the interesting timing of this with other OLPC stories?

    say for example Microsoft's criticism that olpc won't run Windows?

  20. Luxuries Versus Necessities by reporter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    John C. Dvorak gives a specific example of a core problem: buying luxuries in the absense of satisfying basic needs.

    One of the characteristics of a failed 3rd-world nation is that its people spend money on projects that are not directly related to providing basic necessities. To understand this issue, first look at a highly successful people who transformed themselves from a 3rd-world nation into a 1st-world economic superpower. Consider the case of Japan.

    At the end of 1945, Japan was impoverished. Allied forces had bombed it back into barren rock, of which some became radioactive. In the ensuing 35 years, the Japanese people focused on the basics: building the infrastructure (e.g., railroads and public schools), acquiring industrial technology (e.g., transistors from the Americans) to expand its industrial base, etc. Specifically, Tokyo invested almost no money in military forces, space adventures, etc. By 1980, Japan became a 1st-world nation -- and the #2 economic superpower.

    Now, consider India. Its people are wasting money on a space race and nuclear weapons. This activity only impoverishes the impoverished people, who are the majority of the Indian population. The result is that the prospects for India are quite poor.

    Forget laptops. Forget space ships. Above all, forget nuclear weapons. If you are a citizen of an impoverished nation, focus on the basics: reading, writing, mathematics, science (includng agriculture), and free markets. If you can succeed at the basics (and everyone can succeed at the basics), then your nation will naturally prosper.

    Look at Japan. In the 1960s, the Japanese watched, without envy, as the Americans "won" the space race. The Japanese knew that their day in space would come, but in 1965, they knew that they must stay focused on the basics. The Japanese succeeded.

    Similar comments apply to Eastern Europe. Look at Poland. It does not waste money on either nuclear weapons or space ships. Yet, Poland is succeeding. It will soon become a Western economic superpower alongside Japan.

    1. Re:Luxuries Versus Necessities by enjahova · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you are a citizen of an impoverished nation, focus on the basics: reading, writing, mathematics, science (includng agriculture), and free markets.
      How, pray tell do you expect a citizen of an impoverished nation to be reading your English post on an internet forum without a computer and access to the internet? How would they do it if they didn't "focus on the basics" of reading and writing? Where are they supposed to learn about free markets and agriculture?

      Wouldn't it be amazing if there was a machine that could give them access to all of this information, as well as the ability to communicate with people from all over the world using the internet? Wouldn't it be awesome if kids could learn the basics from one little machine by teaching themselves, rather than depending on their loving despots?

      This isn't a laptop project, its an education project. It isn't a luxury, its a pen, paper, textbook, word processor, paint brush, camera, instrument, and mesh network all rolled into one educational tool.

      --
      "how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
    2. Re:Luxuries Versus Necessities by burnin1965 · · Score: 4, Informative

      look at a highly successful people who transformed themselves from a 3rd-world nation into a 1st-world economic superpower. Consider the case of Japan.

      While Japan had some serious rebuilding to do they were far from a 3rd world nation. Although significant infrastructure was destroyed and the country was in disarray they still had many people who were educated and learned in the ways of industrialization.

      Tokyo invested almost no money in military forces, space adventures, etc. By 1980, Japan became a 1st-world nation -- and the #2 economic superpower.

      Sorry, but that is a false dichotomy. The lack of investment in military development or space science is not the reason japan became a 1st world nation or an economic superpower. If somehow these investments would bankrupt a nation then the U.S. would have been bankrupted long ago and Japan would be #1.

      While I'm no expert on post World War II history I'm pretty sure that 1) Japan did not invest in military development or space science because they were expressly forbidden by the Potsdam Declaration and terms of surrender;
      (I've highlighted what I believe were real contributing factors to their recovery)

      * Militarism in Japan must end.
      * Japan would be occupied until the basic objectives set out in this proclamation were met.
      * The terms of the Cairo Declaration would be carried out and Japanese sovereignty would be limited to the islands of Honsh, Hokkaid, Kysh, Shikoku, and such minor islands as the Allies determined.
      * The Japanese army would be completely disarmed and allowed to return home.
      * Those who had led Japan to war must be permanently and finally discredited, and abandoned.
      * War criminals would be punished including those who had "visited cruelties upon our prisoners".
      * Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established.
      * Japan should be permitted to maintain a viable industrial economy but not industries which would enable her to re-arm for war.
      * The treaty was not intended to enslave the Japanese as a race or as a nation.
      * Allied forces would be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished

      And 2) the post war Japanese economic recovery is well studied and massive investments before and during the Korean war played a significant role in their recovery, not lack of spending on military and space development.

      Forget laptops. Forget space ships. Above all, forget nuclear weapons. If you are a citizen of an impoverished nation, focus on the basics: reading, writing, mathematics, science (includng agriculture), and free markets. If you can succeed at the basics (and everyone can succeed at the basics), then your nation will naturally prosper.

      Party correct, except the laptop in OLPC is merely a tool for "focus on the basics: reading, writing, mathematics, science (includng agriculture), and free markets". I'd suggest that Dvorak and everyone else who keeps pointing out that laptops are not needed should do some prior research into the history of OLPC and perhaps then they would understand its not about laptops, its about education and learning, its about contructive learning, and its not a bunch of pretentious westerners dumping laptops in 3rd world countries, th

  21. Hunger relief is a scam... by flyingfsck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unfortunately, most hunger relief programs are simply tax reduction scams. People donate millions of dollars to these 'aid' agencies, who spend 99% on salaries and other fancy stuff, and then deliver a few thousand tons of maize to some harbour in Africa, where it gets dumped on the dock to rot and get eaten by rats.

    To deliver real aid, you not only have to deliver 10 Thousand tons of food to a harbour - you have to deliver 10 Million tons of food, plus the trains, trucks, drivers, guards, repair and resupply facilities, tents, generators, building materials, pesticides, drugs, bandages, beds, surgical equipment, doctors, nurses and more, if you wish the relief to be at all effective.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  22. Most people aren't starving by vidarh · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Only a small minority of the worlds poor are so poor that starvation is a significant problem. Malnurishment yes.

    Consider countries like Nigeria for example, that is one of the countries that were considering the OLPC. Nigeria recently cleared out $18 BILLION of debt. The interest they've saved each year for a year alone would pay for a million OLPC's. Nigeria is far from rich, but has enough oil reserves that it can certainly prevent people from starving (whether the political will is there is a separate issue). Nobody should send food aid to Nigeria, because it's not what they need.

    On the other hand, even in the areas where famines are rife the OLPC would be more useful than food aid except DURING a famine. A key problem for many farming nations is lack of reliable information that is vital for farmers, such as weather reports as well as information about more effective farming methods, and even prices at the nearby markets to prevent people from literally wasting days carrying goods to markets where demand is low.

    Teaching a generation of kids in locations like that how to exploit computers and online resources will long term mean far more than disaster relief, which is what food aid is.

  23. "They" can't do it... by keepper · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I think dvorak's argument is a pretty common one amongst liberals, conservatist, and centrists alike. And one of his sentences says it all...

    ... There seems to be a notion that the poor in Africa or East Asia are just like the kids in East Palo Alto... Yeah dvorak... what a freaking odd and naive notion that is. That they may be able to achieve everything we can, only with the same tools. Yeap, "They" can't do it...

    We must feed them, guide their politics, make them "civilized", for obviously, they are not capable on their own. And we had no say in their current situation, we are just innocent observers , trying to "help" them.

    It's a sickening point of view, but most seem to hold it, and disguise it in premises that the money is better spent elsewhere. So yes dvorak, while i do agree that there is hypocrisy in many of these actions, and a huge disbalance in wealth in this world, and that people, of all walks, should be doing a lot more... Don't knock those who are doing something ( and the likely scenario is that you knock, but dont do anything yourself ). The just way to solve poverty,starvation, and instability isnt by feeding them and controlling their affairs. It's by giving them the tools and knowledge to correct the wrong, and allow them to rise up with their own ability, which is the same ability present in any human being. Its the way we have done it, its the way they will do it.

    I'm not a religious man, but the fish versus fishing thing aptly applies here.

    ( oh, and btw,, guess why there isnt any of their languages on the web, or any content they can use.. BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT!!! )

    But anyways... just the usual "those people" mentality...
  24. Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Thank you.
    I've been working in Africa for a while, and I swear that the Army is the only organization in the US that gets it. "Not a big fan of the army or wars, but the Army is doing more teaching there then any of the other organizations I've gotten to work with.

  25. Using technology to break the cycle.. by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dvorak is an idiot. Africa's problems stems from it's cultural problems. For instance, the AIDS virus propogates because for some dumb reason people who have AIDS continue to have sex (forcibily at times) with women making the problem more. Nobody seems to have a civic attitude because everybody used to be tribal. I suppose we all started out this way. (btw, I realize this might be a sweeping generalization and obviously not everyone believes that, but the nature of the problem would not be this large if not a healthy portion (no pun intended) was not engaging in this kind of crap. The african libido is truly phenomenal!

    OLPC comes in because children will be exposed to new ideas (or old ideas) that when they grow up will be able to use and implement on their own. They'll learn the value of education, educate their people and then finally we can start offshoring our IT to Africa instead of the more expensive Asia! :-) Something for everyone. But seriously, Africa's time is going to come but we need to have programs like this that allow ideas to proliferate through the young due to the fact that the adults don't seem to have gained sufficient wisdom to end the cycle in the various countries.

    sri

  26. The Western way by markov_chain · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Teach a man how to fish
    2. Lend him a crapload of money under the condition that he buys the fishing boat, fishing equipment and fuel from you
    3. Wait until man can't pay off the debt due to disastrous interest rates, and invoke the default clauses such as taking ownership of his business, and diverting the fish to a Western market
    4. Profit!

    --
    Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
  27. Teaching a man to fish. by sbaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mr Dvorak has obviously never heard the expression "teach a man to fish".

    Sure, you can spend $200 and get a short-term benefit for a bunch of people. But when they've finished eating that truckload - what happens next? You have to buy them another truckload then another and another.

    What's needed is a way to let these people become self-sufficient.

    I imagine a small African village containing 20 teenagers who speak good enlish, are kick-ass programmers with knowledge of the way the outside world works - and web access. I think they can find enough out-sourced work to earn enough for a $200 truck of rice every once in a while.

    I imagine a village with land enough to grow coffee - and the net-savvy ability to sell the stuff directly to gormet coffee drinkers at $10 a pound rather than to big business at $0.10 per pound (I bet it's less than that). Their money accumulates in a PayPal account that they use to buy their rice. Sure they have some bad years when the coffee harvest fails - but they have enough cash banked to tide themselves over - and enough basic math and statistics and weather data from the Web to allow them to analyse how often this is going to happen and therefore the amount of storage they need to store their product and keep running the operation over the rough times.

    Tribal rug makers can sell their rugs on eBay for hundreds of dollars - they can use the computer to allow customers to upload designs like CafePress does - they can go into the custom rug making business.

    Actually - the main thing they can do is to tell me (by replying to this post) exactly why all of my ideas are stupid and how they have much better ones of their own.

    This is a MUCH more fulfilling life than sitting out there hoping that Mr Dvorak will send them a truckload of rice sometime in the next month. The OLPC group are attempting a long term fix - the short term problems will still be short term problem for a long way to come - but if just one generation of decently educated, net-savvy kids can emerge from this - the impact will be stunning.

    So - you can give a man a fish and he eats for a day - or you can teach a man to fish and he eats forever. But, if he doesn't understand the basics of fish ecology, he probably destroys his local fishery by overfishing it. So if you teach a man to get gainful employment on the world stage, he can buy all the goddamn fish he needs just like you or I do.

    --
    www.sjbaker.org
  28. Want to know how to help the 3rd world? by rindeee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Talk to someone in the Peace Corps. Seriously. And no, I am not in the Peace Corps. And yes, I have had this conversation with several who are. Bottom line: The P.C. tries to go in and make a people self sufficient. They try to help them establish a means of commerce, build small business, drill wells, etc. The minute the "Sally Struthers" of the world show up giving away food and life staples, the Peace Corps leaves. You see, the Peace Corps folks and their crazy ideas about helping communities become self-sustaining can't compete with give-aways. You can NOT eat a laptop. You CAN learn with it. Learn to read, write, communicate. Learn about your world, AND the rest of the world that you are completely clueless about. Learn skills and information that would otherwise be completely unobtainable. Is the OLPC going to save the world? Nope, but neither are Sally and the gang. "Teach a man to fish" and whatnot.

  29. Re:he's got a point.- no he doesn't by flyatcheerful · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hell, what do you know, this little article has actually pissed me off enough to get me contribute. A fair achievement in my long and almost entirely parasitic slashdot relationship.

    Before we even start on a response, the eternal question arises: Did he, or did he not donate a single google ad earned cent to hunger relief as he so glibly concludes at the end of his tirade?

    Somehow I suspect he smugly punched the submit button on his blog and went back to browsing around looking for more soft targets to lure more indignant ad clickers in with, without a second thought for the starving millions he so crassly claims concern for.

    Honestly the man is so clueless as to how the rest of the world that he claims empathy for operates he might as well start writing on the subtle nuances of Mongolian yodelling.

    First, kudos for googling iSiswati and isiZulu. I'll be interested to see if his next article that mentions German calls it Deutsche. Honestly, if you going to write in English use the English words. Swazi and Zulu. And had he taken the time actually scroll down the wikipedia page he used for the spelling he may have noticed links to projects concerning translations of software to those exact languages or even, heaven forbid, an online Zulu Newspaper. And er, perhaps if my mates in KwaZulu Natal has a few more of these computer things, they could uh, you know, actual write those "missing" wiki's. Oh wait, hold on THEY DID!

    Now, if you will bear with my rant a little longer, for those seething uneducated masses that daily have to choose between mastering MySQl and filling the belly, I think that dear old dozy Dvorak will get a rude surprise if ever he ventures out of his oh so grounded in reality Silicon Valley and met some staving minions.
    I know from personal experience that many families that have to choose between food on the tables for themselves and an education for their children, will give both the food and education to their children and suffer in silence themselves in the hope that those children at least can escape the lives that they as parents feel they cannot escape themselves.

    How, pray tell, will the expired and rancid grain not fit western tables that Mr Dvorak claims so to be so keen to sponsor, help to create a better life for those children? Seriously, I actually want to know how.

    And as for theft, does our dear old correspondent in the land of the free(speech, NOT) even know how little of that relief he is so generously offering to pay for actually makes it to the people who need it after all the officials, leaders, warlords and general low life opportunist have taken their cut.

    Good point, of course there will be losses to theft etc. But as he so deftly points out only 13% of the Niger population can read. Last time anyone checked, 100% of them could eat. So if they had to choose between raiding the latest food package or stealing some kids laptop, I don't know about him, but I would rather be protecting the laptops.

  30. quarantine by epine · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdot degrades itself when it runs stories by Dvorak. It can't look good from any perspective when half the regular membership is tagging a story submission as troll. I'll show you how it works. Watch me degrade myself by making references to Woody Allen. In fact, I did watch Sleeper the other night. (An interesting calculation: when Allen wakes up in the year 2173, Soon-Yi will be 203 years old. Gaaa! Given enough time, he'll prove us wrong yet.) Dvorak is the Howard Cosell of the IT industry, and that's probably paying him a complement he doesn't deserve.

    1. Re:quarantine by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 4, Funny

      I have little clue who this Dvorak is and really don't care but he really must suck if they are calling to ban his ass from /.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

  31. On having been to Africa by QX-Mat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On having been to Africa, I'm in complete agreement.

    What a lot of people don't realise is that most African's are fairly happy, and fairly adapted to their way of life. A computer won't help kids. A computer only helps administrators, and typists.

    One of the projects I did while in Zambia was to help renovate a school. African's would rather have more materials for their schools, working radios they can teach with, or more access to simple life saving treatment such as blood or TB vaccines.

    A rural teacher who I met simply wanted bars in the windows (holes) of his Oxfam built school so kids wouldn't climb in a steal what little supplied he had. Paper and pens were far far more useful than computers.

    We have to look at India and China. They're becoming the world Math and Scientific elite. Employing an education system Britain abandoned 40 years ago in favour of modernising. Educations works.

    Even though I dislike most religions and the dangerous ideologies they breed, religion in many developing countries is a key focus point for community driven development - people like to pitch in where there is a support structure; but support structures need money! Even if it's just food to sustain some of the 80% unemployed in Zimbabwe so they don't take to looting, hostage taking or drugs.

    There are better things to donate money to: such as anti-corruption schemes or Médecins Sans Frontières.

    Take your pick, GO TO A DEVELOPING COUNTRY AND SPONSOR A VILLAGE FOR AS LITTLE AS £50/m, just don't get a piece of technology for a child who can't charge it.

    Matt

  32. Bingo: unintended consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is an incredibly important point: direct food aid competes w/ local production and serves to put farmers out of business. Note that Western food subsidies have been a major bone of contention in recent free trade treaty negotiations for much the same reason.

    The XO, on the other hand, is very unlikely to put local chip fabs and ISVs out of business. Instead, it will facilitate learning and communication.
          kieran hervold

    1. Re:Bingo: unintended consequences by rthille · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hey, I hate python (did Guido learn nothing from the Makefile debacle?), but I can't imagine that the XO kids will learn nothing from a system designed with a very intelligent architecture, with security designed in from the ground up, with access to source for everything and with a focus on learning. I imagine that children who learn about computers from an XO would be much better developers than kids raised on Windows.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    2. Re:Bingo: unintended consequences by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK so the thing runs Linux, well so does my cell phone and fat lot of good that would do for learning programming.

      The problem with the phone is not that it's a phone, but that the service provider purposefully locks it down and restricts access to developer tools. The XO most emphatically does not have this problem! In fact, it's the opposite: everything about it was explicitly designed to be easy to develop for (even by the children themselves), and that is why it is useful.

      But they missed and the price is not far short of the price of a conventional machine but with a huge number of compromises.

      On the contrary, what you call "compromises," I call "necessary features." The XO is less powerful? That's a good thing -- it means better battery life. The XO doesn't have a hard drive? That's a good thing -- it means better reliability and better battery life. The XO has a "weird" screen? That's a good thing -- it means it's readable in conditions where a "normal" screen is not, and, yes, better battery life.

      It doesn't matter if you could make a "conventional" laptop for the same price (e.g. the EEE or whatever). It doesn't even matter if you could make a Core 2 Quad, SLI, 20" TFT screen laptop for the same price! It would still be fucking useless for the intended purpose because it would neither have the battery life to get anything done, nor even stand up to the expected environmental conditions in the first place!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Bingo: unintended consequences by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have always thought Negroponte somewhat on the whacky side. He seems to be oblivious of the iron law of IT: standard is cheaper than non-standard.
      Show me one non-standard component on the OLPC. I'm looking at Wikipedia, and it looks to me like one big laundry list of standard components.

      Sugar is the only really non-standard piece, and that shouldn't add significantly to the overall costs.

      You also claim that this "non-standardness" makes it less useful as an educational tool. You make it sound like the OLPC's purpose is to teach programming, which simply isn't the case. Hell, its primary purpose isn't even computer literacy. But it does come with several language interpreters, and I'm guessing a really ambitious student would be able to get a C++ compiler running on it. I'm just not seeing the problem, unless you're of the "if the kids aren't learning Windows, MS Office, and MS Visual Studio, they aren't learning" mindset.

      It does not matter much how much something costs today, wait one technology cycle and what was the bleeding edge is the commodity item, wait two cycles and its on closeout.
      Which is why Negroponte is still expecting to hit the $100 price point next year. Of course, by three cycles, they don't make them anymore, which is why you don't see any $20 486 laptops these days.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  33. Also known as... by DrYak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    . Lend him a crapload of money under the condition that he buys the fishing boat, fishing equipment and fuel from you


    Also known as "Windows 3$-edition pre-installed on Classmates", to put a parallel to the current situation.
    That's why Negroponte is trying to push hard for open-source solutions.
    So there's no restrictive conditions. So people target by the OLPC can actually own the technology and not be hooked and dependant on a western seller (Microsoft).
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  34. Transcript by Nazlfrag · · Score: 5, Informative

    INTERVIEWER: Tell us how it works John

    DVORAK: This is the formula for pissing off Macintosh users, for getting a lot of links or attention, and this has been deconstructed but never accurate, let me give you the deconstruction.

    First I'd write something that would be semi-innocuous with just enough insulting stuff to get a lot of attention from the Macintosh community. So then they would write in, and by the way it would always be done in such a way that I would have outs, in other words I would write in kind of a weasel way. I would then, then I'd get one column with a lot of numbers.

    Then I'd get a lot of hate mail and all kinds of Macintosh reaction and then I would react to it as though I was flabbergasted, that everybody misinterpreted me and they hated it and I don't get it and what was wrong with these people, which would piss them off even more. So I'd get huge hits, after that..

    INTERVIEWER: What was the point of all this?

    DVORAK: Now wait a minute, for the numbers..

    INTERVIEWER: Which numbers exactly? What numbers are you looking for?

    DVORAK: And, believe me, lots of numbers. Now then I let it simmer down for a while and when whatever position I had taken originally I would change the position exactly the opposite, and tell the Macintosh people I was completely wrong and they were right all along and the numbers would go through the ceiling! (laughter)

  35. this is actually a longstanding sore point by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of poor countries complain that "aid" is in effect a subsidy to western farmers plus product dumping, which completely destroys the market for their own local farmers. They'd prefer to have monetary support for their own local farmers instead of flown-in foreign food, but when they ask for donations of cash instead of food, they're usually told no due to fears of corruption. Now admittedly that's a real fear, but it doesn't solve the fundamental problem that paying American farmers to dump product cheaply on Africa is not going to make Africans richer. It does help American farmers, though, many of whom not coincidentally live in politically important states.

    1. Re:this is actually a longstanding sore point by lxw56 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's an idea: to help them become self-sufficient and give aid that will be hard to corrupt, we could give them, say, laptops to help educate their children. idea?