Slashdot Mirror


OLPC CTO Quits to Commercialize OLPC Technology

theodp writes "The One Laptop Per Child project suffered a blow Monday, with CTO Mary Lou Jepsen quitting the nonprofit to start a for-profit company to commercialize technology she invented with OLPC (the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents was published by the USPTO on Dec. 13). The OLPC project halted consumer sales of the cheap laptop at the end of December."

168 comments

  1. Huh ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Troll

    Much as I hate to say it, it sounds like that OLPC group didn't consult an attorney to have a proper contract drawn up between all parties. Not that I RTFA or anything.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Huh ... by Fantom42 · · Score: 1

      According to the article, she is just moving on in a different direction, and will still help the OLPC project in her new capacity by providing parts at cost.

    2. Re:Huh ... by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not that I RTFA or anything.

      You got that right. FTA: "I will continue to give OLPC product at cost, while providing commercial entities products they would like at a profit," Jepsen wrote in an e-mail.

      She was responsible for designing the display, which, depending on who you ask, is either really novel and cutting edge, or a substandard compromise to modern display design. Personally, the display is not anything I would want for standard laptop-like use.

      The OLPC has their low-power display, and now she can go off and make the technology available to other markets instead of keeping it exclusive to the OLPC. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

      Dan East

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    3. Re:Huh ... by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only that, but if commercial sales result in higher volume, then the production cost will go down, and it's a win for everyone: OLPC users, consumers who buy the commercial version, and of course the open source software world in which this machine lives.

      --
      Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    4. Re:Huh ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound like a typical american. everything is about the lawsuit and screwing people out of a way to make a living. how about thanking her for her contribution and wishing her well in her new endeavor. OLPC is non profit so how is she hurting it by starting a 'for profit'? the only thing it can do is help develop newer technology used in OLPC. win-win for everyone.

    5. Re:Huh ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting. You complain that I'm being too judgmental, yet immediately put me into a compartment conveniently labeled "typical American". Come back to me when you have some idea what a typical American is, my hypocritical friend, if you ever manage to successfully define what that means. Matter of fact, don't bother coming back.

      In any event, when someone leaves an organization and takes key patents with them it is usually not good for that organization, because they no longer control critical assets required for their future survival. In such cases, that usually means that the organization failed to protect its interests, and the fact this woman is promising that she will make parts available at coast is just rhetoric: you can choose to believe it if you wish, but that doesn't mean it will happen that way. That's the only point I was trying to make, genius. Deal with it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Huh ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Pardon me, "at cost".

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:Huh ... by grcumb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      She was responsible for designing the display, which, depending on who you ask, is either really novel and cutting edge, or a substandard compromise to modern display design. Personally, the display is not anything I would want for standard laptop-like use.

      Don't be so quick to disparage it. While I'll be the first to admit that it's not really necessary for typical indoor use, the extremely high definition and brilliant contrast make it possible to use a portable device in scenarios you might not have considered before.

      I did a month-long evaluation of an OLPC B2 prototype, and the thing that appealed to me most was the fact that it made it possible (or at least conceivable) to have constant access to information at all times, without worrying about rain, sun or shade, accidents, dust and most other kinds of things that make laptop-users cringe. The display played no small part in this.

      I live in what the UN designates as a Least Developed Country, so I'll admit that my needs are special. But I can think of dozens of ways in which a device with similar attributes to the OLPC would be useful to inhabitants of the world's most developed cities. Their low cost and robustness, combined with their suitability to the task, finally give us true commoditisation of information technology.

      This dual-mode screen is really impressive when you see it at work. It is truly innovative because it makes new uses of computers possible.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    8. Re:Huh ... by orasio · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      About your sig...

      --
      Instant +5 Insightful: just say "All Americans suck because {insert generalization here}" Let me give it a shot:

      All Americans suck because I believe in representative democracy, and think that people should be accountable for the actions of their government. Your government sucks, regarding its effect in the rest of the world, therefore you suck.

      (That is just an exercise, not exactly what I would say. For instance, I wouldn't say Americans, because I live in South America, for most of us "Americano" means "a guy born in America, the continent", we say "yanquis" to mean "Americans", much alike what mexicans mean when they say "gringo" )
    9. Re:Huh ... by tgd · · Score: 1

      I love the display. There's some slight banding to the color, but it looks very sharp in color mode and absolutely razor sharp in B&W mode.

  2. G1G1 didn't end in November by TimHunter · · Score: 4, Informative

    The OLPC project halted consumer sales of the cheap laptop at the end of November. Erm, no. The quoted story is datelined November 25. It's January now, folks. The G1G1 program was extended until yesterday http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/index.php/.
    1. Re:G1G1 didn't end in November by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      from the article: (which might explain why its mentioned now...)

      Her last day with the organization is Dec. 31, though she will continue consulting with OLPC, according to the e-mail. Dec. 31 is also the end of OLPC's Give One Get One program, in which two XO laptops can be purchased for about US$400, with a user getting one laptop and the other being donated.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:G1G1 didn't end in November by lhorn · · Score: 1

      ...And as far as I saw, noone offering this for delivery in Norway.
      What's the matter with the OLPC - is our money smelly?
      I DO want a sturdy, light laptop with long battery life. The Asus EEE comes close, but no cigar due to high energy requirements. I do not want flash or movies, I need web & decent text display, and the ability to stand sand and water in accidental amounts. I would even go G2G1!

      --
      accept no limits but time
    3. Re:G1G1 didn't end in November by emilper · · Score: 0, Troll

      IMHO, the OLPC was only a marketing ploy: let everybody know there is a cute little extremely portable weather proof low energy computer that nobody can buy yet, so that everybody will drool (the way I am doing now, imagining myself owning a black XO and being able to read during commute without damaging my eyesight with a PDA) and want to buy it when it goes into production.

      Why it was not shipped outside US ? That is called market segmentation: let the secondary market drool a little and envy the primary market, then sell the same product at the highest price the secondary market will bear when you have enough stock. It was done with the game consoles, it is done with movies and music, why not with the OLPC's commercial successor ?

      The "buy two, get one" was, imho, just a test, to see how it's going to sell and do some testing with real users.

      I hope I did not sound like a anti-capitalist freak ... I think what are they doing is just fine, the only complaint is that it takes so damn long for the XO to get to a shop near me. Come on, Negroponte, my wallet is as wet as it can get, and I'd shoot 300 Euros without thinking too much for a black or grey XO anytime you're ready.

    4. Re:G1G1 didn't end in November by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why it was not shipped outside US ?
      There's no conspiracy here: The OLPC foundation is not Microsoft or Apple with legions of paid staff who can just set up base anywhere in the world and immediately start fulfilling thousands of orders. They're a tiny team who were massively overstretched just trying to meet demand in the country of their base of operations. In short, the reasons are manpower and logistics.
  3. So... by ud+plasmo · · Score: 1

    So in other words, she did an 'ebay' on them.

    --
    Norris Normal - Who am I?
    1. Re:So... by ckblackm · · Score: 1

      As of tonight (1/1/08) there were 33 OLPC laptops I saw on Ebay. Christopher.

  4. innvocation by kavehmz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Who said that free movements had no innovations? :) Also it had invented a bitch.

    --
    Be like shadow in the light or darkness.KMZ
  5. Sounds great. by notthe9 · · Score: 1

    This sounds like this could be great for everyone. Hopefully Jepsen's new career path leads to more and more products having the sorts of technology we're seeing used by the OLPC folks. She can continue innovating as the XO is designed and the OLPC project focuses on manufacturing, distribution, and such and then cooperate with the OLPC people in the future as their product will be updated.

  6. Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by Kostya · · Score: 0

    I don't know what this means for OLPC, but I hope it doesn't fragment it or hurt the movement. I just bought mine yesterday through the "Give one, get one" (or however that goes). I figure I'll either hack a little on mine or give it to a local family I know who could use it (and not be able to afford it). I think it's a great idea. I know some criticize and go one about providing basic needs--but why can't we do both? These computers represent a quantum leap in education--which will hopefully translate into a significant improvement in living conditions for many. If we all step up and try to support programs that provide food, water, and health care, imagine the possibilities!

    Not to criticize OLPC, but I think they should just keep the "Give One, Get One" program going. They could even drop the price a little and use the success of the project overall to purchase free ones for third world populations. Maybe it wouldn't be as direct or immediate as the 1/1 ratio now, but it would keep things moving. But I get why they are doing what they are doing--I just hope it succeeds and that people are as giving as they give them credit for ;-)

    --
    "Doubt your doubts and believe your beliefs." -- Switchfoot, Ode to Chin
    1. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by nuzak · · Score: 1

      > Not to criticize OLPC, but I think they should just keep the "Give One, Get One" program going.

      I don't. By OLPC's own admission, many have been getting DOA or flakey laptops, there is no support, and the cost of dealing with hardware problems on an ad-hoc basis could drive them under. I don't begrudge their program or technology, I'm just pointing out that G1G1 cannot ignore market realities -- and shouldn't participate in it unless they're prepared to jack up the price in order to afford it.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    2. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      No you've got an educational laptop, you can find out what a quantum leap is.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    3. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I forget the term for it, but some charities operate businesses aimed at crowds not in need of their charity in order to fund the charities they are involved with. It sounds a lot like this move is going along these lines which should translate to what you suggest, jack up the price in order to afford it so they can participate.

      Personally, I can see a lot of use for Tech in the OLPC project outside laptops. My understanding of the screen is that is doesn't wash out in sunlight so a variety of Fish finders, control panels, GPS units, and so on might be able to benefit from it the display tech along. And speaking along the same lines, Sonar -depth/fish finders units, could be adapted to use different and perhaps better processing power making use of more receivers for finer and more accurate results on less costs.

      I was thinking just the other day about a passive sonar device to detect the presence of a human within a certain distance of a bus using normal engine noise as a base signal. Throw this on a small display pointing to the location of the bus and the driver will have a second audible and visual warning if he fails to see a child dangerously close to the unit, or perhaps one that has fallen under the wheel's track that might be missed when looking into a mirror. It could also record the data and allow management to instruct the driver the kids (or people) are walking to close to the bus as it is driving off. Both issues that could cause accidents taking small children to and from school. I'm thinking with four or six receivers and a little mathematics, this shouldn't be too hard to accomplish. I think the OLPC device might be powerful enough in itself to power the unit let alone adapting the components to streamline costs that it is hardly a tick in the budget for poor school districts when provisioning new equipment.

    4. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forget the term for it, but some charities operate businesses aimed at crowds not in need of their charity in order to fund the charities they are involved with.
      Bullshit - is that the word you're looking for?
    5. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it is called "social entrepreneurialism". I was hoping someone who wasn't a bitter troll could refresh my memory on this but it seems you made me dig out some information and look it up.

      An example of this is Athena Partners who sells bottled watter as a non profit to raise funds for breast cancer. Baldev Farms which is one of largest Banana plantations on South India exists to raise funds for The George Foundation's Women's Empowerment program. IT is another prime example of this concept effectively working. There are more if you look around.

    6. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 2, Funny

      Baldev Farms which is one of largest Banana plantations on South India exists to raise funds for The George Foundation's Women's Empowerment program.
      Thanks for the (previously unknown to me) examples of this type of business/philanthropy mix.

      But a banana plantation in support of Women's Empowerment, hmmmmmmmmmmm ;-)
    7. Re:Bought mine (and some child's) yesterday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm;-)

      No batteries required ?

  7. Initial Reaction by JamesRose · · Score: 1, Insightful

    My initial reaction was "What the hell, you theiving bastard stealing technology from a non-profit organization" But when you look at it, what difference does it make going out and selling these cheap laptops for profit, firstly the main selling point is gone, and the market is gone, so its just another cheap laptop- all be it with a littl einteresting technology, but nonetheless, atleast here in the UK that market has already been entered (asus eepc) so, betrayal- probably morally rather than contractually (Sp?), good move- probably not actually.

    1. Re:Initial Reaction by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Since when has punctuating like a spastic chimpanzee on LSD been insightful?

      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
    2. Re:Initial Reaction by AvitarX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Since the mods started smoking crack.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Initial Reaction by jc42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My initial reaction was "What the hell, you theiving bastard stealing technology from a non-profit organization" ...

      So have you read the news that the patent in question is owned by the OLPC project? The report that she's stealing something seems to be pure calumny. If anything, she's working on developing the parallel retail marketing that so many people have been suggesting. And if successful, her company will be paying license royalties to the OLPC project.

      Does anyone know differently? It'd be interesting to get some more accurate information than what we've read here so far.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  8. It Makes Sense by bmartin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A person claiming responsibility for some of the XO's innovations has left the OLPC in order to be compensated for her inventions. I don't see the problem with this. The power consumption technologies are amazing; hard drives, processors, and displays all consume a lot of power.

    My laptop only runs about 40 minutes at full bore (i.e., if I disable all of the power saving features). There is much work to be done in this area. I'd like to see a huge transition from HDD to solid state disks (i.e., 2.5" and 3.5" flash-like drives), as well as from CISC to RISC processors, especially for servers running on the x86 architecture. The former is probably more likely. HDD pales in comparison to SSD for reliability, performance, and power consumption. We already have small devices that run on flash memory; why can't we use similar technology for laptops in the future?

    --
    "You could almost look at defense of Microsoft as a form of the Stockholm syndrome." -neapolitan
    1. Re:It Makes Sense by MMC+Monster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Frankly, I'm surprised someone hasn't commercialized the OLPC hardware/software combination yet.

      The specs are free, and the hardware is quite impressive (battery life and durability wise). Sell a laptop for $200 that can do internet access and you will likely sell-out to the Walmart crowd.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    2. Re:It Makes Sense by MacTO · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A person claiming responsibility for some of the XO's innovations has left the OLPC in order to be compensated for her inventions. The main problem that I see: she has benefited from another purse while developing this technology, then kept the patents for her self to benefit on. It may be acceptable in a human-eat-human world, but it is far from charitable. Maybe it would have been better for her to move on and develop better technology, then patent and profit from that. For example, that XO display has a number of benefits over the competition but still has deficiencies. With her knowledge of the original, perhaps she could have gone on to develop one with a higher contrast reflective mode. (As an example.) That way at least she is doing something outside of the context of the OLPC project to add value, without straight off stealing the goods.
    3. Re:It Makes Sense by Da_Biz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Too subtle?

      Nope, just right: it let us know that you're a raving, foaming-at-the-mouth troll. You may have some basis for what you're saying, but have decided not to explain it further.

      Thank you come again.

    4. Re:It Makes Sense by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The main problem that I see: she has benefited from another purse while developing this technology, then kept the patents for her self to benefit on. It may be acceptable in a human-eat-human world, but it is far from charitable. Maybe it would have been better for her to move on and develop better technology, then patent and profit from that. For example, that XO display has a number of benefits over the competition but still has deficiencies. With her knowledge of the original, perhaps she could have gone on to develop one with a higher contrast reflective mode. (As an example.) That way at least she is doing something outside of the context of the OLPC project to add value, without straight off stealing the goods.

      How? We have no idea what the agreement between her and OLPC was; and as another poster pointed out the patent is assigned to OPLC - not her. I would guess tehre has been some sort of licensing agreement reached between her and OLPC that both find reasonable and beneficial to avoid nasty lawsuits.

      She, understandably, wants to make some money off of her ideas; while still benefiting OPLC (selling components at cost per TFA). Just becasue she was at a non-profit doesn't mean she shouldn't do what many have done before - leave to start their own company. often, non-profits can't or won't commercialize products; and employees leave to fill what they see as a market opportunity; having worked at a non-profit I've seen that happen first hand - in this case; after trying to convince the organization that they could create a for-profit sub and use the profits to fund other activities.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:It Makes Sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait???

      S/he just said what MOST of us are thinking about this. Just because *you* might not have the balls to come out and put it so bluntly, doesn't mean it's flamebait, people.

    6. Re:It Makes Sense by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Just because you and the GP are thinking it doesn't mean everyone is thinking it.

    7. Re:It Makes Sense by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Hard drive power consumption is over rated. At MAX, notebook hard drives consume about 2 watts. On an average 60W/hr battery, it could run at max for 30 hours. The performance and power consumption benefits are too meager to justify the cost of SSD. A system designer would get a lot better bang for the buck investigating other power saving measures.

    8. Re:It Makes Sense by pla · · Score: 1

      Just because you and the GP are thinking it doesn't mean everyone is thinking it.

      So I suppose you wish her well in her new endeavor - Making money off "her" IP that OUR donations of time, money, and goodwill, subsidized the creation of?

      Hey, deny it if you want, or put it more delicately if you fear some form of retribution, but she's shown her true colors; and I, for one, have no reservation about calling a spade, a spade. I have nothing against making money - I wouldn't mind doing so myself, someday. But to (try to) do so with a bait-and-switch involving 3rd world kids... You just can't get a whole lot lower than that.

      People said far worse things about those running bogus charities post-Katrina, and those involved far less deliberation and systematic lying to their donors.

    9. Re:It Makes Sense by emj · · Score: 1

      Sorry I'm not sure I buy that, the screen tech was more or less researched when they started the project, not true?

    10. Re:It Makes Sense by turgid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Frankly, I'm surprised someone hasn't commercialized the OLPC hardware/software combination yet.

      Look at what intel and Microsoft have already tried to do to the OLPC. Do you think they'd stand back and let anyone else have a go?

    11. Re:It Makes Sense by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see a huge transition from HDD to solid state disks (i.e., 2.5" and 3.5" flash-like drives), as well as from CISC to RISC processors, especially for servers running on the x86 architecture.


      Uh, what? Harddisk to solid state disk makes sense for a laptop but the cost/GB is too high, especially if you have racks and racks of servers. As for CISC vs. RISC, it's amazing that people still bring this up. For most modern processors (PowerPC, x86, etc), the CISC and RISC distinction doesn't make any sense whatsoever anymore.
    12. Re:It Makes Sense by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Look at what intel and Microsoft have already tried to do to the OLPC. Do you think they'd stand back and let anyone else have a go?

      Also, Intel and Microsoft are making some good money on their laptops, which have a fairly high markup (almost as large as Apple's ;-). They are probably looking with horror on the prospect of what an OLPC-like machine will do to their bottom line.

      It could be interesting to read about what pressures Intel and MS have been able to put on other vendors to block the sale of machines like the OLPC. Anyone have any good info on the topic?

      Note that the OLPC's source code is all available online. Anyone with the investment capital could buy similar hardware, install the same software, and (with maybe a bit more memory or a disk) include piles of free software for adults. They should be able to match the $399 price pretty easily.

      How long can the big guys block this? And how exactly are they blocking it?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    13. Re:It Makes Sense by asuffield · · Score: 3, Interesting

      from CISC to RISC processors


      That's 1990s stuff. The whole CISC vs RISC thing has been completely obsoleted by modern chip designs, which render the distinction meaningless. RISC was a solution to a problem that no longer exists (and CISC was nothing more than the lack of a solution).

      You can build CPUs fast or low power. For ia32 CPUs built fast, see Intel and AMD. For them built low-power, see Via. You can buy laptops with Via chips in them, and they have considerably more battery life. Don't whine when you find out that they won't run Oblivion, or Vista, because they aren't that fast.
    14. Re:It Makes Sense by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Your time? Are you an employee somehow affected by this, or are you just flaming? This is not a bait-and-switch, since I'm not seeing anything being removed from OLPC. Good tech has been developed, and there's a market for it. OLPC is not willing to expand there, so why should they prevent anyone else from going there?

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    15. Re:It Makes Sense by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      HDD pales in comparison to SSD for reliability, performance, and power consumption.
      Very true. Except the HDD only accounts for 4 to 7% of power consumption of a laptop, see this link, page 8. So it's worthless concentrating just on this part.
      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    16. Re:It Makes Sense by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      A person claiming responsibility for some of the XO's innovations has left the OLPC in order to be compensated for her inventions. I don't see the problem with this.

      As long as the OLPC Foundation is never compelled to pay licensing fees to the new corporation for technology originally conceived for OLPC's benefit, I don't see a problem, either.

      Even though I'm eagerly anticipating receiving the reward for my Give One, Get One donation, I know that it's not designed for users like me. If a commercial laptop is developed that uses many of the innovations of the XO-1, I'll be one of the first in line for it.

    17. Re:It Makes Sense by pla · · Score: 1

      Your time? Are you an employee somehow affected by this, or are you just flaming?

      Countless open-source developers (a category in which I consider myself a member) have contributed their "time" (deliberately or not) to the OLPC project. Somehow I doubt many did so intending to give Jepsen a stepping stone to fame-n'-fortune (or in this case, notoriety and thirty pieces of silver).

      As for why people consider my original post in this thread as flamebait, I can appreciate that I worded it a bit harshly, but I mean every word of it. She betrayed people interested in a charitable project.


      since I'm not seeing anything being removed from OLPC

      Except control of key IP related to the project. You ignore that little detail at the risk of seeing another fiaSCO when her "commercial effort" finds itself in direct competition with the "infringing" OLPC project.

    18. Re:It Makes Sense by fbjon · · Score: 1

      I think in most cases, the license says they did intend so.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    19. Re:It Makes Sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Further, the announcement on the OLPC news page suggests the parting is entirely amicable:

      2. Mary Lou Jepsen: Mary Lou's last day at OLPC is December 31. She will be continuing to consult with us on a number of different fronts as she chases after her next miracle in display technology. Mary Lou was OLPC employee Number One, both in terms of when she joined the organization and in terms of the breadth and depth of her contributions. Thank you and best of luck with your adventures in a new role and new year.
      There is no suggestion that Jepsen leaving will deprive the OLPC of anything but her immediate attention. The article summary puts a misleadingly negative spin on an otherwise non-event -- especially by implying that the planned end of the G1G1 program ("commercial sales"?!) is in any way related to her leaving or that it signals any sort of setback.
  9. Is it just me? by bloosqr · · Score: 1

    Or is there just something really distasteful about the way the OLPC was hyped, sucked obscene amounts of funding and ultimately delivered? Media Lab's always had a degree of self-congratulatory hype machine about it, but the OLPC at $200 is way overpriced, way too specialized as far as maintainability, and this little patent trove they've accumulated and will now "sell" to others is just the icing on the cake. This ordinarily wouldn't bother me but its all being done under the guise of helping 'the poor 3rd worlders' which frankly I think is nonsense. The 3rd worlders will build their own machines from asian/chinese parts and replace them w/ similarly cheap parts when bits break at basically the same price point the OLPC is selling at. That will cover 99% of the 3rd world just fine, OLPC is over engineered for a very specific subset of rural, dirty and apparently earthquake prone 3rd world. What they really built was a fantastic low power rugged laptop for engineers/field technicians in an outdoor rough environment (oil derricks, large machinery etc) (and I bet this is what the spin off is going to cater too) but funded it by having us think of those "poor 3rd worlders"

    1. Re:Is it just me? by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was a Negroponte project, what did you expect.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    2. Re:Is it just me? by BeanThere · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's just you. Seriously, calm down and take a few deep breaths; the sheer awfulness-of-it-all you're seeing everywhere doesn't really exist. It costs $200 because that's about what it costs to build such things with current tech, that's all; it's not such a bad price for what you get; licensing and commercialising the technologies is not evil - on the contrary, by increasing distribution and scale, they can make it cheaper (and there is free market competition now from AO Asus and Intel to keep the prices low) - cheap simple computers selling in large numbers WILL help the 3rd world. Last I checked they had quite a few orders from 3rd-world countries, which ARE going to benefit (basically all (non-corrupt) free-market trade is mutually beneficial - if they weren't going to benefit, even at the current price, they wouldn't have bought it). I live in a 3rd-world country. Trust me; any cheap computer is better than no computer at all (and NO, 3rd-world countries are not "just going to make their own" - the reason they're 3rd-world is that they don't (yet) have it in them to just start making things like computers).

    3. Re:Is it just me? by Dan+Ost · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have you played with an OLPC yet? These machines are very clearly designed for children, not adults. Nobody with adult size hands could touch type on the keyboard.

      That said, they're great little machines. One of our engineers bought one and we've been playing with it for the last couple of weeks. It's small, light, waterproof, and is quite capable. As far as I can tell, from both the hardware and software standpoints, the OLPC is exactly what they promised that it would be (except it's a little more expensive...hopefully they'll be successful in bringing the price down).

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    4. Re:Is it just me? by bloosqr · · Score: 1

      I played w/ it for about 30 minutes a few weeks ago. the current version is clearly designed only for children, one might imagine it wouldn't be that hard to design one w/ a proper sized keyboard at some point. It is way too rugged by spec than it really needs to be I think (droppable from X meters, waterproof?) (and simultaneously has noncommodity/support issues, which I suppose may be fixed at some point).

    5. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, its just you. Now go in the corner and sulk.

    6. Re:Is it just me? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      It is way too rugged by spec than it really needs to be I think (droppable from X meters, waterproof?) (and simultaneously has noncommodity/support issues, which I suppose may be fixed at some point).

      Technology aimed at kids needs to be rugged. Never underestimate the damage potential of a 8 year old hyped up on kool-aide.

      They can drop it and they can accidently poor liquids on it.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    7. Re:Is it just me? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Have you played with an OLPC yet? These machines are very clearly designed for children, not adults. Nobody with adult size hands could touch type on the keyboard.

      Hey, it's much larger than a BlackBerry's keyboard, and look at all the adults that seem to love those. ;-)

      Actually, I have an OLPC sitting on my desk. My hands aren't tiny, and I can (just barely) do the standard touch typing. It was tricky at first, but I'm rapidly getting better at it.

      Now if I could just figure out how the browser's bookmark feature works ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    8. Re:Is it just me? by adriccom · · Score: 1

      Heh. There should be a Star in the toolbar towards the right (try all the tabs), and it will add a Boomark, and the bottom toolbar to hold it.

      The trick is that you need to rename your Browser activity session, and resume it from Journal to see the Bookmarks again.

      Swing by #olpc-help or check out the wiki for other hints :) http://support.laptop.org/

      hth,
      adric

      --
      <script>alert("I never liked JavaScript, really; it just seemed a bad idea.");</script>
    9. Re:Is it just me? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      It's small, light, waterproof, and is quite capable.

      Water resistant, not waterproof. I'm planning to use mine in the kitchen on occasion, and am happy not to have to worry about accidental splashes of liquid onto it, but I sure wouldn't try using it in the bathtub.

    10. Re:Is it just me? by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      I played with one too, at a nerd xmas party, and if I was a Kid, I would be jazzed to have it.

      --
      music lover since 1969
  10. One Cell Phone Per Child is next ? by gelfling · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if there is some way to bootstrap this to get the price of high function cell phones down? After all the high end HTC phones are little more than palmtop computers that have a phone instead of a modem and NIC.

    1. Re:One Cell Phone Per Child is next ? by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yea, but the sims reader and the locking device would cost around $800 or so. You would still end up with an over priced phone that doesn't do exactly what you want and you can't take it to another provider when you find out the current one is crap when considering your needs.

      And with that, you still need a quality microphone and headset. The plus side is you could wrap the contents into a box like shape that resembles a womens work boot and get that 80's retro look down pat. The good thing about it, unless your driving, would be that you could wind it up when your battery goes dead while talking on it. Just don't wind it up while texting and driving at the same time.

      And for a serious note, I'm sure something productive could be done but I'm not sure anyone with the power to do so would be interested. They already control the game and it is a very profitable one at that. It is easier to just mark up the costs and sell you a "plan" while you think your getting a discount and they are still pulling in the profit.

    2. Re:One Cell Phone Per Child is next ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      WTF is that 'locking device' ?

      That should be some fucking science-fiction star-wars thing to cost $800, considering that a complete unlocked phone is under $200, and most of that price is the display and the battery.

    3. Re:One Cell Phone Per Child is next ? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Dude, it was a joke. didn't the 80's style womens work boot look making it retro clue you in on some things?

    4. Re:One Cell Phone Per Child is next ? by hkroger · · Score: 1

      After that comes "One HDTV with a Gaming Console Per Child". After all, PS3 is also a linux PC and has networking features.

  11. Not Necessarily Bad by lansirill · · Score: 2, Informative

    She'll continue to consult with OLPC and provide product to OLPC at cost. I think, I may be overlooking something, I'd love to see all of the OLPC tech released into the commercial market this way. It could help drive the manufacturing costs down and get the XO back down to the original $100US per unit goal. I participated in the Buy One, Get One program because I thought the hardware sounded damn handy, despite being configured for children.

    I am all for anything that brings us closer to a similar commercial unit at a reasonable price as long as it isn't directly detrimental to the OLPC project. This does seem like this could go in a similar direction to the Classmate PC, but that would be the decision of the final manufacturer/distributor and would presumably require price breaks to be competitive. Honestly I haven't looked into the Classmate much, but I may have to spend a little time looking into it. I disliked having Windows on such a project, but I really don't know enough about the hardware to feel strongly about it.

  12. This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by erroneus · · Score: 1

    The "consumer demand" for OLPC is based on its price and novelty, not on its performance or utility. She has jumped ship quite prematurely and her character flaws will soon result in a bitter future for the OLPC project and her own independent ventures.

    If she thinks she can start collecting royalties on the OLPC and get rich, which is what I suspect is her intent, she'll find that it won't pay off nearly as well as she imagines and ultimately, she'll end up selling her patent rights to some company that somehow sees the OLPC operation as a competitor.

    The OLPC project has proven to be a very interesting story to follow in that various new technologies were developed or improved while creating the devices. But it seems that there is very strong potential for OLPC to fail due to greed and short-sightedness. It's shameful, but it's neither rare nor unexpected.

    1. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by sumdumass · · Score: 1
      What in either article linked makes you think

      If she thinks she can start collecting royalties on the OLPC and get rich, which is what I suspect is her intent,


      The articles reference an email she made that said

      I will continue to give OLPC product at cost, while providing commercial entities products they would like at a profit,


      what she is saying is, you will always have yours but other who want it will pay more for it. Actually, this is somewhat common with charities. They hold business ventures that are connected to the non profit aimed at people the non profit isn't attempting to address. This creates a revenue stream, simplifies development and costs associated with it and ensure a cheap commercial production of a unit that benefits the project in and of itself.

      "At costs" on an ad-hock production basis is going to be more then "at costs" for a automated commercial production model. You buy things in bulk, automate production lines, have more or better skilled workers increasing quality not to mention a commercial feedback method that can improve overall quality and reliability. This just seems to be a win-win situation for everyone. Even you as a consumer would hopefully benefit in some device that gets extra battery life, increased readability in sunlight, or has decreased costs because of using this tech or because competition from it demands it.

      The OLPC project has proven to be a very interesting story to follow in that various new technologies were developed or improved while creating the devices. But it seems that there is very strong potential for OLPC to fail due to greed and short-sightedness. It's shameful, but it's neither rare nor unexpected.
      Only if your not paying attention. This Greed and short sightedness will lead to improvements and costs savings and implementation that we all can benefit from. I'm not saying that everyone will, but the potential is now there. It isn't shameful but it is unexpectedly benificial.
    2. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The "consumer demand" for OLPC is based on its price and novelty, not on its performance or utility. She has jumped ship quite prematurely and her character flaws will soon result in a bitter future for the OLPC project and her own independent ventures.

      Not true. I have an Asus Eee PC. It's a fantastically useful little laptop. Sure it's not as fast as modern laptops, but its plenty fast enough for web browsing, mail, skype, word processing, even movie playback. The important thing is that it's cheap, small, light and boots and shuts down fast. You can throw it into a bag, you can open it up in coffee shops, or in a lecture hall, or wherever you like with no hassle at all. I even used it on a Ryanair clip tray the other day. If you've flown Ryanair you'll know what an impressive feat that is.

      The OLPC has many of the same benefits as the Eee PC and adds a few of its own such as lower power, kid-strength robustness and swivel screen. It's screaming out for a consumer version. Sell them with some more memory, some more storage and a cut down Fedora and they'll sell by the truck load. Just like the Eee PC is doing right now.

      I am really surprised they aren't commercializing the OLPC. The profits from a consumer spinoff can be used to lower costs and fund the charitable arm. Everyone wins. I'm personally disappointed since I ended up buying an Eee PC when I was very much hoping the OLPC would recognize the opportunity first. Oh well. Perhaps this story is garbled and CTO has resigned because this is exactly what they're trying to do.

    3. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by Anarchitect_in_oz · · Score: 1

      The thing rarely pointing out, as well, as reduce production costs by increasing production and tapping demand.
      She is also moving most of the hardware R&D costs and risks to be supported by for profit company. Leaving the Non-profit organization to concentrate on it's true goal.
      Improved Yields, better QA, all the sorts of things that will happen with a commercial product will mean that OLPC will end up getting a better product for the same price or less.

      Win-Win Indeed

      --
      "Call us when the New age is old enough to drink" Beck
    4. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by adriccom · · Score: 1

      Trolls aside, this was the plan all along. OLPC is, as Mr Negroponte has been quoted often enough as saying, "an education project, not a laptop project".

      Commercialization of all the technology is important to the plan, and not only because it will help bring the 200 $USD price down toward the goal price. If OLPC is retaining the IP, then that may help the project by providing a revenue stream. In fact the manufacturer Quanta has had plans to make and sell a commercial version of the hardware all along, and the project has never objected.

      --
      <script>alert("I never liked JavaScript, really; it just seemed a bad idea.");</script>
    5. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by DrXym · · Score: 1
      I think a commercial version of the hardware - more or less the exact same hardware - is very important to start selling now. The Eee PC shows the demand for these kinds of devices is there. I think the OLPC is ready to sell with some modifications to its specs to make it more attractive to consumers. Make it black, boost the CPU, memory & storage and maybe minor modifications to the case / keyboard and it will be very popular.

      I can see it being very popular as an educational version (which I will elaborate on in a second), an industrial / rugged version and even military versions. Now OLPC is educational by nature but I believe that they should also be selling these things in toy shops, perhaps with a different colour and more "fun" software.

    6. Re:This will prove to be a HUGE mistake for Jepsen by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      Trolls aside, this was the plan all along. OLPC is, as Mr Negroponte has been quoted often enough as saying, "an education project, not a laptop project".

      He can say that as often as he likes, but the project is still named "One Laptop Per Child", not "Education For Every Child".

      Whether by intent or side-effect, the OLPC project has resulted in some fantastic innovations in low-end portable computer design. And though the software aspects of the OLPC project are just as innovative, I think it's disingenuous of Negroponte to give the hardware such short shrift.

  13. Really Bad Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The program wasn't "Halted" - the end date was extended to 12/31 - the headline is written to make it sound like this chick left and the program was "halted".

  14. Love That Profit Motive by hyades1 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't know the details of the new technology and who deserves to be compensated for it. Frankly, I couldn't care less. What really, really makes me sad is that all of us...the "First World" countries...use so much and have so much, yet we're so goddamned cheap about spreading it around.

    I'll freely admit that I'm pulling a number right out of my ass here, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the total cost of the Iraq invasion (including care for wounded veterans) outstripped the total expenditure on aid and charity over the period.

    It might be time to have a look at our priorities.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Love That Profit Motive by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, too many people have this attitude, and it's just very naive. If poverty could be solved by mere money, it would've been solved a long time ago. The real problem is infrastructure. When money is sent, a large proportion ends up in corrupt hands. The problem of poverty is not a lack of money, it's the lack of stable political systems. Or, to put it another way, a lack of stable Capitalism.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    2. Re:Love That Profit Motive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'outstripped' is an understatement.

      I reckon the cost of the Iraq war was at least an order of magnitude more than the aid and charity over the same period.

      But then you have to define 'cost'. There are people who made money from the war.

    3. Re:Love That Profit Motive by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Even though I live in a 3rd-world country I disagree. The first world gives *massively* in many many different ways to the third world, seriously.

    4. Re:Love That Profit Motive by FailedTheTuringTest · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your ass is correct. In 2006, the USA spent $23.5 billion on official development assistance, and $100 billion on the war in Iraq. (Iraq is currently the largest recipient of American aid, and one could debate whether that portion of the aid budget should actually be counted as part of the cost of the war. Before the Iraq war, the largest recipient of aid was Israel.)

    5. Re:Love That Profit Motive by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      However, it's darn hard to solve a poverty problem without money.

      The real problems are complex and intertwined. That doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be addressed. Of course, it's more points politically to serve up simple solutions, and in fact lots of aid is spent to prop up thoroughly corrupt regimes that happen to be useful to first world governments. Moreover, first world corporations benefit from corrupt regimes that can be trusted to deal with any unionization efforts with extreme prejudice, and who have no interest in making their countries self-sufficient in any way.

      What the countries need in order to benefit most from money is a democratic government with relatively low corruption, but that's hard to get without a minimum level of wealth. Anything that will increase education and communication is likely to make democracy more feasible. Of course, any increase in democracy is likely to be inconvenient to foreign exploiters, and may well be opposed by people with money.

      Capitalism is largely irrelevant here, since corporations are no more concerned for the general welfare than corrupt governments. What the countries need is government accountability to the people, and some actual benevolence from the first world would help.

      This is why I'm in favor of the OLPC project. I don't know if it'll actually do much good, but it has to be better than sending food to people who have no prospect of learning to feed themselves, and handing over money to corrupt bureaucrats.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    6. Re:Love That Profit Motive by aeschenkarnos · · Score: 1
      Capitalism is largely irrelevant here, since corporations are no more concerned for the general welfare than corrupt governments.

      No, they have opposite goals. Companies by default are concerned solely for their own benefit, and any deviation from that to benefit other people is remarkable charity. Governments by default are concerned for the benefit of their citizens, and any deviation to that to benefit private individuals is corruption.

    7. Re:Love That Profit Motive by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Redirecting money from the Iraq war to charity aid wouldn't solve very much. Not waging wars in the first place might, however.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    8. Re:Love That Profit Motive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they have opposite goals. Companies by default are concerned solely for their own benefit, and any deviation from that to benefit other people is remarkable charity.

      No room for enlightened self-interest in your world? In mine, many corporations do good things they don't have to because it actually turns out to be a net win in the long run. For example, many tech companies do a variety of things with higher education, ranging from mere funding to cooperative projects. They realize the next generation of their engineers has to come from somewhere, so they help out.

      Governments by default are concerned for the benefit of their citizens, and any deviation to that to benefit private individuals is corruption.

      This is one of the most shockingly naive statements I've seen on Slashdot in a long time.

      Governments by default are concerned with keeping themselves in power. Some governments have enough enlightened self-interest to realize that keeping citizens happy and prosperous is a good way to stay in power. Some don't (just like some businesses don't realize that helping higher ed is a good thing).

  15. There is no profit by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    In being nice.

    You might make a living giving yourself away, but you wont make a real profit.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  16. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by hab136 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Third World doesn't need laptops. It needs rice and medicine. Or ideally, it needs none of these things, since the reason it's having problems is that it's disorganized and cannot support its own population. Let them die out and the third world stabilizes itself.

    Rice and medicine are great in the short term, like after a disaster, but long term any free aid like that just kills local industry, ensuring that the third world country you're "helping" remains third world - and dependent on aid.

    Laptops to poor people may seem useless (and I'm not convinced of their worth), but at least it's trying to change the underlying cause of being poor (access to production), instead of simply prolonging their existence for another day.
  17. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was going to flame this comment because it's title sounded like something worth flaming. But then I saw the text and realised that it's really art. Jihadist (if that's your real name) ; you have brought a new vision to the world. Many people have created characters who were incoherent or unable to communicate. The idea of someone who can contradict themselves five times in the same sentence whilst at the same time giving the impression of a neo-phycho-conservative-paranoid-loser is something incredible. Your character, going beyond a mere inability to communicate with others or simple self-satisfied lack of understanding of others actually manages to treat the entirety of humanity with as a singular "you"; a level of mental illness seldom reached in great literature and certainly an amazing feat for a slashdot comment. Truly you are the master of the isolated sentence.

  18. Just sell the thing for $199 by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, they need to get the price down to $100. Instead of selling them in the US at $400 at a 100% profit margin to raise money for charity, they need to just sell the things for $199 commercially and take over the low end market. In a year or two, they'll be down to $99 through sheer volume.

    Those things ought to be in bubble-packs at the local drugstore, alongside the cheap calculators, electronic dictionaries, and other low end electronics. This wouldn't stroke Negroponte's ego, but it would get the things out there in volume. Soon enough, they'd be available all over the world, purely on price.

    Jepsen probably sees this. Negroponte wants to meet with heads of state and be in the press.

    1. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by slamb · · Score: 2, Informative

      Those things ought to be in bubble-packs at the local drugstore, alongside the cheap calculators, electronic dictionaries, and other low end electronics. This wouldn't stroke Negroponte's ego, but it would get the things out there in volume. Soon enough, they'd be available all over the world, purely on price.

      They're doing pretty well on volume now. They have a brand-new factory, and last month they planned to ship 150,000, then 80,000-100,000 every month after (source).

      Where are they going? I just did a bit of hunting. Uruguay ordered 100,000 units(see wiki) and Peru ordered 260,000 (see this post, near bottom). According to the "country news" section, Mexico's also placed some order; I think 100,000 is the minimum order size. 150,000 to 170,000 individual G1G1 orders and 15,000 for Birmingham, Alabama, for a total of around 400,000 G1G1 laptops (see interview), so I believe they have solid orders for 800,000 laptops.

      Hopefully when they've had success with those 800,000, the other countries that originally intended to be part of the launch will get back on the bandwagon. So while I'm not a manufacturing expert, I would guess the difference between 1 million/year and 2 million/year isn't going to hugely affect the cost.

    2. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by slamb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK, they need to get the price down to $100. Instead of selling them in the US at $400 at a 100% profit margin to raise money for charity, they need to just sell the things for $199 commercially and take over the low end market. In a year or two, they'll be down to $99 through sheer volume.

      $100 is in some ways a harder target now than when they originally set it. I don't recall exactly when they first talked of it costing $100, but the dollar has fallen in the last five years (e.g. 25% against the GBP), and the OLPC folks have upgraded their system specs (e.g., 128 MB RAM -> 256 and 512 MB flash -> 1024).

    3. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Jepsen probably sees this. Negroponte wants to meet with heads of state and be in the press."

      lol... looks like somebody has actually met Negroponte...

    4. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Damn skippy they need to do that. G1G1 is bullshit; you're not "giving" a 2nd machine, you're just donating $200 to OLPC's overheads. I don't get $200 of warm fuzzy from that. I'd happily pay $200 for an XO, I'd pay $250 if I had to, and I might (after a few beers) splurge $300 on one. But $400 for one device? Never going to happen.

      I find it hard to credit OLPC's claims that they want volume sales when they could ship these things by the millions in Japan and Korea. The XO is ideal for those markets, especially if someone knocks up a half decent telephony app for it. Unfortunately, at $400 a device, that "someone" won't be me.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. True Dat.

    6. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The head of which state does slash dot?

    7. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by jc42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd happily pay $200 for an XO, I'd pay $250 if I had to, and I might (after a few beers) splurge $300 on one. But $400 for one device? Never going to happen.

      But apparently lots of people would. If you look at the actual price of things like an iPhone or BlackBerry, i.e. how much of your 2-year contract is for the PDA, you'll find that they are selling for well over $400, and selling quite well. And, as various others have pointed out, the OLPC really is just a slightly larger PDA with a handle. And it's a much better PDA than most (if not all) of the others on the market. Especially if you're 10 years old. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    8. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      Those things ought to be in bubble-packs at the local drugstore, alongside the cheap calculators, electronic dictionaries, and other low end electronics.

      Casio, HP, and TI are still charging $90 for the same models of graphing calculator that I used in high school Trigonometry class fifteen years ago.

      I don't think they'd take very kindly to a $100 general-purpose computer being sold alongside their ancient artifacts.

    9. Re:Just sell the thing for $199 by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      But OLPC say that they need volume, not profits. $200 per unit would get them far more than twice the volume of $400 per unit. I find their claim hard to credit.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  19. I fail to see ... by SubComdTaco · · Score: 1

    how this as blow to the OLPC project, she is still offering her technology at cost to OLPC and still consulting with them. Also, because of the G1G1 program Haiti, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Mongolia, and Afghanistan now have seed programs, which means that her technology is now on display in at least eight different countries[counting Mexico and Peru].

  20. "At cost"? by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1

    What does it mean when she says she will continue to provide OLPC "at cost?" Does she (or her new company) do the actual manufacturing? If that's the case, it's very honourable. Or does she mean "a reasonable break even patent licensing cost," in which case it's a little "evil."

    Was she hired by OLPC? Yet she retains all the patents for her work?

    The incremental cost for any patent licensing is effectively "0". (Note, I said "incremental" cost. Yes, there's development effort put into it, which may or may not have been on OLPC's dime, not her's. But whether they make 100,000 or one billion OLPC's, any incremental cost for patent usage should be zero.)

    I'm all for a profitable commercial version; I'd love to have a lower powered (and physically powered) laptop, for so many different purposes (web browsing, thin client, and so on). I love the idea, but I wouldn't want it to be at the expense of the original purpose of the project.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  21. the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents? by niceone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The linked patent may have Jepsen listed as an inventor, but it is assigned to "ONE LAPTOP PER CHILD ASSOCIATION, INC.", so I'm not sure why it's mentioned in the summary. She's can't use that without OLPC's permission.

    1. Re:the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents? by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      Because it suits with ohh so well started OLPC smearing campaign? It is getting old, period. And I don't care what actual facts are. All I see is two possible scenarios - there are bunch of over jealous geeks who thinks that truth with opinion is better truth than facts OR it is fully paid campaign against OLPC, to smear it's aims, to smear it's creators.

      I simply choose to believe OLC team rather than article submitter who can't right even summary somehow objectively.

      Someone from OLPC team wants to commercialize on OLPC inventions? Rock'n'roll to that person who will do it! Rock'n'roll to those people who helped to invent them. It will revolutionarize laptop and even desktop market. They are so longing to have some shakedown.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
    2. Re:the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "It will revolutionarize laptop and even desktop market"
      No it won't. What it is doing is getting portable computers into new hand, and it is certainly creating a new market. That's cool, but it won't change desktop or laptops.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      ... it is certainly creating a new market. That's cool, but it won't change desktop or laptops.

      We've been playing with a couple of them here at home for a week now, and I'd predict you're wrong. It has a number of things that could really shake up the market.

      One thing is their mesh network. I remember some time back reading a bunch of the original design docs for the original ARPAnet back in the 1960s. There were diagrams of all sorts of military equipment talking to each other wirelessly, without any central "access points" that would be targets. An important part of the requirements was that if there existed a data path between gadgets A and B, the intermediate machines would forward the packets.

      It's been forty years, and the commercial Internet has never provided this. They insist on keeping control of communication by requiring that all customer products relay through access-point hardware, so that customers can be tracked and billed for everything.

      But now, finally the OLPC project has implemented what the DoD wanted 40 years ago, and fully wireless network that has no single chokepoints of failure, with all the "leaf" nodes cooperating to get the packets through without relying on special-purpose relay machines.

      And the code is FOSS. So no company has any excuse for not picking it up and including it in their next upgrade.

      Our experience here at home is that it works far better than the couple of commercial APs that we've tried. Right now we have an Apple Airport Extreme. Twice today it went into its occasional mode of fading in and out rapidly. Our wireless Powerbooks essentially had no usable wifi for the duration, about half an hour each time. But funny thing - the OLPCs kept right on working, using our Airport without problems when the Macs couldn't get a connection. The OLPCs also work fine with a neighbor's Linksys AP. We verified that we could carry one OLPC 100 yards away, and the second one 200 yards away, and they both had full wifi access (though the Mac didn't).

      Once the news of this gets out, it'll be interesting to see Apple and the commercial comm companies (Verizon in our neighborhood) come up with PR to explain why their wifi works so much worse than the OLPC's.

      Stay tuned ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    4. Re:the first of Jepsen's pending OLPC patents? by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      Yeah, mesh network, tickless kernel, sun readable screen, full solution of activities instead of some half-backed OS with Windows style interface...It won't change, yeah, right.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  22. WTF by Bananatree3 · · Score: 0, Troll

    IANAL but WWFSMD? TMI! TMI!

  23. The end of G1G1 was discussed on olpc-open by jrincayc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here are some links:
    http://olpc.osuosl.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1414
    http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/olpc-open/2007-December/thread.html#459

    The general reason given for ending G1G1 was that it was a strain on the OLPC volunteers. See especially Nicole Lee's post http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/olpc-open/2007-December/000474.html

    1. Re:The end of G1G1 was discussed on olpc-open by jc42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The general reason given for ending G1G1 was that it was a strain on the OLPC volunteers.

      This makes a lot of sense. Negroponte and the others have been repeatedly emphasizing to their critics that they're not a computer vendor; they're an educational organization. Negroponte is a professor at MIT, not a corporate CEO. They haven't (to my knowledge) come right out and said it, but I expect that they're hoping for some startup companies that can take away the pressure to market this thing. This seems to be exactly what's happening in this case. The patent is staying with the OLPC crowd, and presumably they're happy to license it to someone who wants to work on commercial sales (and give back part of their profits as license fees).

      If the OLPC crowd had gone with commercial sales, it would have just bogged them down by sucking them full time into marketing and support. The educational project would have fallen by the wayside in the rush for profits. And they'd have had no public support in their inevitable battle with Intel and Microsoft. This way, they can continue with their educational goals, and let others fight the market battle with the giant monopolists. And if it takes off commercially, maybe they can get a share of the profits.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  24. Re:Close but no cigar by nick.ian.k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What afflicts the third world seems to be disorganization, corruption, dishonesty, and low intelligence. That's why they're in the fix they're in, just like some communities in the USA (trailer parks, urban ghettoes, "artist communes") are third world status because they're filled with dishonest, disorganized, foolish people.

    And we all know that these characteristics are absolute, because everybody in these places is dishonest, disorganized, and foolish, and they're all there because they chose to be there. And because all success takes is somebody to decide they're going to dig themselves out. It's not about resources, it's about willpower. These people can end their struggle and saunter off to Cigarandbrandytown and make a mint whenever they like.

    No, wait, it's not like that at all. People are born into poverty, it's a genuine bitch to get out of it, and most have to spend at least the first 16 to 18 years in it by default, during which they may either luck out and develop solid values and see what's so incredibly fucked about where they're coming from, or they may experience quite the opposite and have their health ravaged by subsisting on cheap convenience foods, using drugs, and placing heavy value on trivial material possessions viewed as luxury items --never mind the education issue. And then leaving home with no financial aspects whatsoever is an utterly fantastic way to get set to enter the job market, where most positions available for people with no certifiable skills provide precious little room for advancement in either position or wage; the result here is either changing jobs a ton and seeming unstable or unreliable, or sticking it out longer-term with one or two businesses and then not getting anywhere and looking like a slug who does the bare-minimum to not get fired.

    I could go on, but speaking as somebody who *did* grow up poor and pull himself out to live in a decent neighborhood and ultimately land a job paying $40,000 a year -a sum many of you will figure as paltry, but it's more than I'd ever anticipated making when I was a kid watching the cops come and haul away the latest drug dealing neighbors every few months- I can tell you that the people who pull themselves out are exceptions. Most people are stuck there because their situation is utterly hopeless, many of them know no better, and there is precious little in the way of outside stimulus to encourage them to get out beyond waking up every day and knowing that the people in the nice houses thirty miles down the road consider you to be the scum of the earth, which isn't really "encouraging" in the way most people would use the word.

  25. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by Loke+the+Dog · · Score: 2, Informative

    Europe is a net exporter of food.

    Please people, can't you atleast study the basic isses of poverty and starvation based on facts rather than just having strong opinions based on assumptions? The info is on wikipedia, if you can't be bothered to even read wikipedia, you're not entitled to an opinion!

  26. too rugged? by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's a dearth of rugged laptops on the market, just a few and pretty expensive. On the other hand, you can get any number of delicate laptops that commonly turn to junkage within a short time. I think this project has really pushed the envelope and embarrassed other manufacturers into considering similar better/cheaper/tougher machines. It hasn't hurt, put it that way. There are different market segments based on needs and price, we need them all, there is no one sits fits everyone machine. You want expensive and delicate, you can get that right now, they'll gladly sell you one. You want real tough and cheap,until this thing came around, not so much doable. And one of the main points with laptops are they are portable, even *gasp*, the theoretical ability to use one out in the big room with the yellow light and blue wall paint. Regular laptops are pretty sucky there, the screens disappear, you have to worry about the weather, the battery life sucks with all of them, this one however claims it is actually usable out in the light and also has a few different self powered options, meaning long range "battery life" away from a wall plug..

        I know I have been holding out getting another laptop, after having three of them, because I just can't use them outside. If I am inside, well duh I have a desktop with a big screen. and I don't hang out in starbucks and so on, but I am an outside worker and could actually use one now and then. But it has to be dust and moisture proof/resistant and be able to take some knocks beyond the normal lightweight commuter train ride and sitting at a cafe or conference table. Hopefully this better screen tech and "ruggedness" will induce other builders into making adult sized versions without them costing more than semi-decent used cars.

  27. one laptop per CHILD by tepples · · Score: 0

    What's the matter with the OLPC - is our money smelly? It's that you're not a child. Have your state/province/country's department/ministry of education look into deploying XO laptops.
  28. I never heard back from her . . . by ejp · · Score: 0

    Well I sent her an email, cover letter and a pretty good resume when the project was kicking off, I never heard back. Always a bit of a red flag on a personality by my set of rules. But maybe she was busy!

    1. Re:I never heard back from her . . . by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 1

      Did I miss a joke here? Since when does anybody expect a response when they send their CV to anybody but a personnel department (unless specifically instructed otherwise)? Sending it to a principle is tantamount to a crank letter as it screams that you have no idea how submit your credentials professionally.

    2. Re:I never heard back from her . . . by IdeaMan · · Score: 1

      Sending a resume to the personnel department pretty much guarantees the same end result: No hire.

      --
      They ARE out to get you simply because They are in it for themselves and they don't care about you.
  29. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by jd · · Score: 1
    Well, laptops produce high-tech skills. High-tech skills produce external investment. External investment produce the resources needed to dig third-world countries out of the hole they are in. It's a good long-term solution, but there's a huge gap between the immediate-term of food/medicines and the decade+-term of training an advanced workforce.



    One of the problems with a number of these countries is deforestation has altered the reflective index of the ground and, in turn, altered the local climate. Another problem is that there has been some level of dependence on natural reservoirs and natural water sources. All fine and good, except when environmental shifts have depleted the natural reservoirs and instability has impacted availability of natural water sources.


    The cost would be high, but it should be possible to produce artificial reservoirs with (a) some degree of protection against evaporation, (b) some degree of artificial change in reflective index, and (c) some method of pumping heat. It need not be a perfect setup, it need only be good enough to capture torrential rains and release them slowly to farmers, and also encourage even a fractional increase in rainfall in the region.


    That last one seems ambitious, but horticulturalists and engineers are experts at building microclimates and a microclimate is all this is about. A small microclimate that has a fractionally higher humidity and a way to exploit it.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  30. Why everybody is impressed? by ghostbar38 · · Score: 0

    I mean, is the best way to get even cheapest products selling more and more, producing more and more, this is the only way to get cheaper products and if they get cheapest products then they can compete against Intel and Asus! This is NOT bad.

    --
    ghostbar page.
  31. Patents... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, patents are "goog" as long as "good" people own them? Or are they still "bad"?

  32. Exactly.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only way to understand the true reasons for perpetual poverty is to experience it for yourself. I always find it amusing when people who have quite obviously never been in that situation decide that they know exactly why people continue to be stuck in poverty. Why yes, of course it is because they are all simply unintelligent and happy to ride the dole for the rest of their lives.

    Thank you for taking the time to attempt to insert some sense into the discussion. If I hadn't spent my mod points a few hours back, your post would be at the top of the heap, where it should be.

  33. patents by celle · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't the patents belong to the olpc project since it was done on their tab. Nice to see ethics in the well educated.(not) I doubt she didn't get paid and compensated for her developments.

    1. Re:patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to see that the troll of a summary gets responded to by well educated (not) posters with enough time on their hands to post but not enough to look up the info. lamer.

  34. A complete betrayal of the open source movement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To find out that OLPC has funded a patent troll truly disgusts me.

    This calls into question the integrity of everyone associated with the project.

    1. Re:A complete betrayal of the open source movement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This calls into question the integrity of everyone associated with the project. This only calls into question the integrity of your brain. Try to read about what she is going to do first, then flame if you have to. Hint: she's actually going to do something intelligent.
  35. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Informative

    The OLPC was a marketing ploy and nothing else.
    To what? Sell cheap laptops to enhance education? That's what they're doing so what's the problem?

    It's not a donation, the countries it's being targeted at are buying these laptops. If anything it's an education scheme to improve a countries citizen's knowledge. It's going to take 10 maybe 15 years before we actually know if it worked of course.

    The Third World doesn't need laptops. It needs rice and medicine.
    Since they're the ones purchasing the laptops I don't think it is appropriate for you or me to tell them what they need.

    Western aid to the third world has done nothing but breed more people who cannot take care of themselves
    The OLPC isn't a donation. The countries are purchasing these PCs. Western aid is off topic.
  36. Offer expired ad... by Chapter80 · · Score: 1

    The OLPC project halted consumer sales of the cheap laptop at the end of December.
    And for the first time, today, 1/1, I saw a TV ad for OLPC (buy one, get one program). Nice ad. Which ended with "offer ends 12/31". Oops.
  37. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure nigerians will make great use of them.

  38. We'll know that it worked... by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    "If anything it's an education scheme to improve a countries citizen's knowledge. It's going to take 10 maybe 15 years before we actually know if it worked of course."

    I think it may be sooner than that.

    The XO seems to include a generous dose of hands-on, tinkering, write-your-own-programs tools. In many ways it reminds me of the start of the PC revolution. One of the really sad things to me is that during the 1980s there were really large numbers of "laypersons" who bought Commodores and Ataris and Apples and IBM PCs for no good reason, just to see what they were like, and wrote trivial programs in BASIC and HyperCard and so forth. People bought magazines that had programs slightly more complicated than they could write for themselves and typed the darn things in.

    For reasons that aren't completely clear to me, this has all gone by the wayside.

    I don't say that everyone who writes a thirty-line BASIC program goes on to become a programmer, but I'll bet that a darned large percentage of the professional software engineers of today were shaped by junior-high-school experiences tinkering with software.

    The guys who invented the airplane probably wouldn't have gotten anywhere without the years they spent tinkering with bicycles.

    We'll know that it worked when there is a sudden wave of software innovation coming out of those Third World countries, and my bet is that we'll start to see it in less than "10-15 years."

  39. Re:Is it just me? No, its me too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OLPC: Over hyped PR company that says a lot and does little.

    They could have shipped the software and standardized hardware using a conventional 7 inch screen and a power brick, and it would have been GOOD ENOUGH for 99% of the children who would use it. Its always been run like an MIT media lab project where the main beneficiaries are Negroponte and his team, and not the children. Its not just you.

  40. Re:Altruism doesn't exist by clacke · · Score: 1

    What the third world really needs is actually for the EU to stop protecting its domestic food production, so the third world can start earning some export profits.

  41. Re:"At cost"? She's profiting more than Negroponte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She wants more than her salary, which I am sure like Negroponte, was inflated at OLPC. The whole project was a non-profit in name only and this is yet another way for the founders of OLPC to profit while others give them "donations", i.e. G1G1.

  42. Price and volume by rbanffy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the OLPC is ever to reach the US$ 100 target price (even if we give it the adjustment for a shrinking dollar) it is via production volume of its key parts. Making them available to other companies via a for-profit seems to be the best way to do it.

    It was always pretty obvious to me that, even if the XO itself does not bring a huge change, its technologies and its "less is enough" approach are bound to make a massive change to a very monotonous market.

    Let's hope it's the next Apple II ;-)

  43. False Economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OLPC -- "the movement" -- "a quantum leap in education" -- "imagine the possibilities"

    Drink the Koolaid much?

    "If we all step up and try to support programs that provide food, water, and health care..."

    People who find themselves at lack for food and water have problems beyond advanced concepts over health care for they fight with natures ability to sustain their numbers. The solution is to let nature run its course and reduce their numbers. Indeed, if we believe in the notion that Man has had a serious negative impact on Earth Climate, we should look not simply at our consumptions but at the number of consumers. The global human population has approximately doubled every hundred years through 1950. By 2050 those numbers are expected to quadruple as the rate of increase goes exponential! What you are advocating serves to sustain the rate of this growth when really, if we wish to reduce Mans carbon footprint, is to reduce the footprint of Man. We can do this ourselves or Nature will do it for us.

    Secondly, by advocating improvements within the human condition you tacitly suggest if not approve of incorporation via participation within the greater global economy thus creating dependencies well beyond any singular peoples ability to self sustain. As poor as the human condition may be found in parts of the world today, they have and will continue to self sustain if left to their own devices. Something that simply is no longer true of modernized societies and is an achilles heel with deadly consequences on a mass scale should mere portions of this highly interdependent global economy falter.

    For all the disease, famine and death, their lives are in balance with nature and their environment such that it is. They do not need laptop computers anymore than they need manufactured petrochemical fertilizers or genetically modified seed from Monsanto yet we have a group of people joined together in some piously ideological "movement" to provide upon others all the trappings of ill conceived conjecture and idle speculation. To fall in league however unwittingly with those of far more predatory and rapacious designs over expansion of exploitable third world economics.

    To think that the suffering peoples of Ethiopia for example would not naturally migrate to more fitting locations if not for such areas already maximally inhabited and therefore found lethally unwelcome in their numbers. The problems do not revolve around inadequate supplies of cheap computers in Mans fight over shrinking resources per capita or overall spiraling rates of consumption found likewise. Is it not foolish to believe that by uplifting the indigenous peoples of the world into a high class of consumerism by way of cheap Chinese electronics, that they will be found better able to manage the consumptions of their expanding population densities?

    And to who's greater good does this serve?

    It is nervously amusing to watch essentially the same OLPC group evangelize in similar process over global warming as though Man in his technological capability of the day can foster a rapid sea change in Earth atmospheric conditions. The most likely outcome in attempt is the destruction of National economies with global consequence but aside from that, what if Man could accomplish the feat? Could Man then control to positive outcome his new found ability to swing planetary climatology short term? Such ability has yet to be demonstrated successfully in other areas far less speculative or adventurous.

    Secondly, who will take responsibility? Those who bequest terraforming the planet or segments of its human population? How can you take responsibility for the actions and outcomes of your "group think" when you cannot take responsibility for yourselves in any meaningful way. I doubt you seriously understand the magnitude of the problems at issue let alone potential ramifications of actions, yet assume somehow that all will result in the greater human condition found ascended to nirvana. A thought process not

    1. Re:False Economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TL;DR we should kill 2/3rds of the population to save the planet

  44. Not to ruin a good witch hunt or anything, but... by Gordo_1 · · Score: 3, Informative
    a commenter claiming to be Mary Lou Jepsen has responded to a similar story on olpcnews.com:

    Hi all,

    Thanks for all the interest in my new company!

    some comments:

    1) My new company *is* trying to explore the concepts of open hardware - and trying to figure out the right way to do it. I've been asking many people for advice on this: Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen, Larry Lessig, John Gilmore, Brewster Kahle, etc. We are struggling through it. Hardware is different from software - but how can we open it up?

    2) Doesn't anyone want a 50 Euro laptop? I do. I'm not talking about designing last years product for next year. Other people can do that..I plan to continue to innovate and invent.

    3) Finally: I'm not taking my inventions from OLPC - I'm licensing them from OLPC. Why: An inventor has a good chance of improving the price/performance of her inventions. Why restrict her access to them if our goal is lower cost computing for the developing world?

    Posted by: Mary Lou Jepsen on January 01, 2008
  45. Relax, it is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nature has shown over and over that whenever a population grows to overtaking an area, she will take care of things. In particular, disease. We have AIDs, Drug resistance disease (esp TB), and are close to having loads of fun with Avian Flu. Combine that with the pressures from lack of water and other resources, and we are looking at a much lower population.

  46. The burning issue by ghost1 · · Score: 1

    The third world needs an inexpensive $100 laptop that poor kids can play Doom on.

  47. FTA by vuffi_raa · · Score: 2

    OLPC is also designing a cow-powered generator that works by hooking cattle up to a system of belts and pulleys. I understand the idea of giving these to developing countries, but I would hope that this gets applied to commercial industries as well- think if you hooked them up to treadmills and elipticals in gyms.....
  48. Jepsen contributed her patents to OLPC by Geof · · Score: 4, Informative

    From what I heard, you're on the right track. Jepsen contributed her display patents to OLPC. She did a lot of important work for them. Criticizing her for going into business seems completely unfair. OLPC is a charitable organization, and is not permitted to compete in the market. For these technologies to take advantage of the market, they need to be developed by a business. This could be very good for them.

  49. Re:Not unexpected... by BeanThere · · Score: 1

    I think you got modded unfairly here; I don't think this is flamebait, you may have a valid point - I've seen exactly this kind of thing MANY MANY times now, here in Africa and also all over the world - one or more people parade as heroes trying to do some good, manage to get lots of funding, then produce little or nothing, and move on to something else and repeat the cycle. I know people who have literally made their careers doing this.

  50. Making a living is all the profit I need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some people don't believe you have to be greedy to enjoy life.

    joudanzuki

    1. Re:Making a living is all the profit I need by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      And most of the people hat say that are millionaires. Go figure.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  51. global warming, pollution, insufferable pride, ... by reiisi · · Score: 1

    Should we let you die out and then our world will stabilize itself? Pink Floyd isn't anyone to quote, really, but they've also said it: Us and Them.

    --
    Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
  52. wave of software innovation ... by reiisi · · Score: 1

    Hmm.

    Is that possibly one of the reasons for the animosity from Microsoft and certain others?

    --
    Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
  53. Might be a valid point? by reiisi · · Score: 1

    I must say that I wish my successes were as "imaginary" as Negroponte's.

    --
    Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
  54. Re:You are absolutely right by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1

    My first program was in Fortran two and was a few lines, basically a Hello World!! I went on from there to a lifetime of software engineering. At the beginning, all there were was mainframes. The smallest machine around was the IBM 1620, and I could only dream of actually owning a computer. Today I own an 8-core Mac Pro. A machine thousands of times more powerful than those original mainframes. My dreams have come true :-) I would have done anything legal and moral to have an XO at that age.

  55. Hmmmmm..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    What about shop rights?

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
  56. Re:Close but no cigar by DataHiker · · Score: 1

    Well said

  57. Re:Close but no cigar by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

    Ok,

    I completely sympathize with your post. However, coming from another previously dirt-floor poor person, I think you might be a little too despondent for the poor people. They have more than a few examples of how to work out of their situation. My uncle is a classic example. My father and his four eldest have worked their way out of the mire and muck but my uncle still doesn't see why he's still struggling to not be poor. The problem is simple. He refuses to change. When he sees a good opportunity that he would like to take advantage of and he doesn't have the funds on hand to do so, he doesn't think "What can I change so that I do have the funds next time?", he instead thinks, "Fuck my luck."

    My wife and I volunteer with several kids from my Dad's church along with my cousins from both uncles... The number one lesson we teach through art, sports, animal husbandry, and outdoorsmanship? Self-empowerment.

    The OLPC is the best damn thing since sliced bread... If we can leverage it correctly. Teach the kids that they have power over something, that little PC is a good starting point, and they might start to see that they can cultivate change in their lives and get something a little better.

    Of course I'm not all 'bluesky' sales about the thing, but life is full of trials and crushing defeats anyway... Why not try to get somewhere nice between the troughs.

  58. It DOES belong to OLPC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does belong to OLPC.

  59. Oversimplification by jihadist · · Score: 0

    And we all know that these characteristics are absolute, because everybody in these places is dishonest, disorganized, and foolish, and they're all there because they chose to be there.


    You don't understand the causal chain.

    They're there because they're what's left when everything else is gone. Fallen empires produce third world nations, or they arise from what never could form an empire. The raw material wasn't there. The people there lack the traits to rise above it, except in a few rare cases (like, 5) every generation who promptly get called witch doctors and publically stoned.

    What are the great innovations of the third world? How many people, despite 100 years of aid, have risen out of these situations to do anything but fulfil jobs that don't require much intelligence at all?

    This topic seems to have really upset some people. Good. You're pretenders who like to think human definitions, and social status, compensate for what nature did not give. You say this because you are afraid of your own weakness.

    Look at the average IQ of a nation and you can tell how impoverished it will be. Northern Asia and Japan are high-IQ; Viet Nam is low IQ. Russia is low IQ, Mexico is low IQ, and Africa is low IQ. Even in the US states we can see that states with a lower balance of smart people are more impoverished.

    That's science. If you can't face it, mod down -1 and claim I'm a "Troll" to formalize your impotence.
    1. Re:Oversimplification by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

      That's science. If you can't face it, mod down -1 and claim I'm a "Troll" to formalize your impotence.

      No, you were likely modded down for inflammatory rhetoric about the poor being dishonest, disorganized, and foolish, which does not meaningfully correlate with people having low IQs or any subsequent innovations which may lead to a particular society's lack of success, and that is what you're talking about here. Even so, your implication that poverty is merely a result of people being stupid, rather than the result of complex combinations of numerous factors as it is in real life, is a short-sighted load of hot air completely deserving of dismissal, much the same of your borderline-eugenic spiel about great pockets of dumb people fucking themselves over in the more destitute parts of the world.

    2. Re:Oversimplification by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Look at the average IQ of a nation and you can tell how impoverished it will be. Northern Asia and Japan are high-IQ; Viet Nam is low IQ. Russia is low IQ, Mexico is low IQ, and Africa is low IQ. Even in the US states we can see that states with a lower balance of smart people are more impoverished.

      That's science. If you can't face it, mod down -1 and claim I'm a "Troll" to formalize your impotence. That's not science. That's a correlation. Correlation does not imply causality. Are the IQ tests biased in favour of the US because they were developed in the US? If the IQ tests are unbiased, are 3rd-world IQs low because 3rd-world countries have inferior educations? etc. etc.
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  60. Re:Close but no cigar by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

    My father and his four eldest have worked their way out of the mire and muck but my uncle still doesn't see why he's still struggling to not be poor. The problem is simple. He refuses to change. When he sees a good opportunity that he would like to take advantage of and he doesn't have the funds on hand to do so, he doesn't think "What can I change so that I do have the funds next time?", he instead thinks, "Fuck my luck."

    That's a reduction. On the surface? Yes, he is refusing to change. But you are not your uncle. You have not endured the same experiences he has endured throughout the course of his life. You do not have the exact same balance of chemicals he has. He may have particular convictions, be they religious or philosophical, which predispose him to particular attitudes regarding the idea of fate or similar concepts. He may have psychological problems that are undiagnosed. And so on. Factors such as these may contribute to his inability to get it together and exercise greater control of what little he has in the way of finances. Even then, financial "best practices" won't produce especially substantial results for a great long while. Does he have any metric for measuring incremental success, so that he can turn around when things seem tough and tell himself not to fret, because things are in fact working out, albeit slowly, and that it's going to be worth it? And after decades of financial hardship, what sort of fear or anxiety grips him upon seeing a bill or invoice, and is it about the cost, or is it a gut reaction that might as well be instinctual?

    Really, I know it seems simple for you and for me when we sit down and break apart a problem, at least from a very general conceptual point-of-view think about a few possible solutions, and then resolve to adopt one and see it through, but think about the difficulty faced when you're going through, and then imagine having some sort of block -beyond being lazy, which is always a possibility: plenty are, well-off and poor alike- which prevents you from even getting to the hard part. You might as well pretend that an illiterate just "believes" that they can't read, or that someone who had a traumatic experience with a dog as a child is being silly for being hysterically afraid of dogs in the here-and-now, regardless of whether they're being attacked.

  61. IQ tests are not biased by jihadist · · Score: 0

    Comprehensive review of IQ tests, intelligence, race, class/caste, income level, and so forth:

    http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/10/james-watson-tells-inconvenient-truth_296.php

    You can apologize later for your unwillingness to discuss real science. (The above focuses too much on race for my taste, and I would again like to mention Eastern Europe as a white third world series of nations, lest this turn into African-bashing.)

  62. Objects produce skills? by jihadist · · Score: 0

    Well, laptops produce high-tech skills.


    I think people need to have abilities first. You can't teach everyone to be a computer programmer. They have to have certain intelligence abilities first!
    1. Re:Objects produce skills? by jd · · Score: 1
      True, but whatever potential skills a child has are useless without (a) information, (b) an opportunity to experiment with that information, and (c) exchange information with other people who have similar interests.

      This isn't a guaranteed way to learn, but history suggests that groups tend to learn efficiently when they have not only the right information but also the right conditions. What constitutes the right conditions is not something that is really known, but it's a fair bet that "Classical" schooling is superior in many ways to modern schooling when it comes to diversity and understanding.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  63. Did Fake Steve nail it? by earlymon · · Score: 1
    Here's the money quote from http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2008/01/more-great-news-for-olpc-team-their-cto.html :

    Another question worth asking is whether Mary Lou Jepsen actually managed to retain ownership of her designs while working for OLPC, a 501(c)(3) organization. If so, doesn't this mean that in effect taxpayers subsidized the R&D for whatever "for-profit company" Mary Lou Jepsen is now about to launch? If so, this is no small thing. I know. Our company uses technology that we tech-transferred from the US gov (we developed it while there) and I can tell you for a certain fact - it is illegal to profit at the taxpayers' expense. Part of our contract required very high payback (sorry, I cannot disclose all details), but think of a $400 hammer that we paid $4000 to the US gov for, specifically to be legal and ensure the taxpayers got their money back - and I mean everything - retirement, direct costs, benefits, facilities costs, everything - went into the calculation for us to know what we owed. Then it was multiplied just as all things are multiplied to avoid cheating.

    Maybe Fake Steve is just tossing bananas for fun, as usual, but he's right, then she's waaaaaaaay wrong and needs to expect extraordinary start up costs. IANAL, YMMV, etc.
    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    1. Re:Did Fake Steve nail it? by earlymon · · Score: 1

      (sorry should have previewed) - meant to say at the end, "... IF he's right, then she's...."

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    2. Re:Did Fake Steve nail it? by oiron · · Score: 1

      Well, you *could* have RTFA instead of fakesteve... She's licensing the tech from OLPC. The patents are assigned to OLPC. She plans to further develop it, and also produce parts for OLPC at cost.

    3. Re:Did Fake Steve nail it? by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Could have, but didn't get too far with it. Thanks for the catch.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  64. What about Microsoft by AlexBirch · · Score: 1

    it's a win for everyone
    You insensitive clod! You've forgotten Microsoft.