Slashdot Mirror
MIT Helps Third World With Hands-On Approach
Hugh Pickens writes "About 60 people from 20 nations will descend on the MIT campus July 14th for the second annual International Development Design Summit to begin an intensive month-long process of creating technological solutions for the needs of people in the world's developing nations. The goal of the program is to develop simple, inexpensive devices that in some cases can be produced locally and make a real difference for people and communities. The event is the brainchild of MIT Senior Lecturer Amy Smith, a returned Peace Corps volunteer and a past winner of the MacArthur 'genius' grant. Previous products of Smith's design class include a bike-powered corn sheller, a metal press that can make clean-burning fuel out of agricultural waste, and an electricity-free incubator. The workshop promotes a shift in focus among companies, universities, investors and scientists toward attacking problems that hamper development in the world's poorest places. 'Nearly 90 percent of research and development dollars are spent on creating technologies that serve the wealthiest 10 percent of the world's population,' Ms. Smith said. 'The point of the design revolution is to switch that.'"
What if the USA stops helping to create wars and manipulating the markets around the world, and helping to create unstable and volatile political situations, that are the conditions that eventually lead all this so called 'third world countries' to be in the terrible situation they are now ... ?
I mean, the USA became RICH thanks to this countries!!. Kill democracy, create wars, sell weapons to both sides, then use it's puppets in the World Bank to get this countries in debt with everyone, Help to create dictatorships, and then go and buy oil and other natural resources really cheap. Corrupt the local cultures and then sell Mc Donalds and stupid movies around the world ...
You know, all the Shit the USA has been doing for the last century to get rich a the expense of the rest of the world.
No, we don't need your stupid help MIT. We need you to stay home, and stop playing to be the world police.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
An appropriate place for a plug for Engineers without borders"
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
The problem is that there is a wide range of poorer nations, every of which is "Third World". There are more advanced nations, like Brazil, Mexico, Thailand, there are some in the middle of the road, like India, Egypt, Pakistan, and then there are the desperately poor, like most of Africa.
The technology needed by each group is different. A cheap way of digging a well is not what the people living in a city slum need most. OTOH, a cheap computer will not be much help people who live in mud huts somewhere in Africa.
Developing nations don't need as much help as nations for which development is stalled.
The solution is to eliminate those who produce the technology used to effectively plunder third world nations and keep the first world in comfort. The knowledge and the old boy network is produced by the Oxfords, the Harvards, the MITs, and unlike the figureheads, these people all claim to be "only following orders".
Disclaimer: I recently turned down places at Oxford and Imperial. I refuse to be part of the problem.
Didn't read TFA, this being slashdot and all, but isn't there a shitload of old true-and-tried local technologies that are not anymore common knowledge in famine and civil war-ridden countries? I'm talking about stuff like traditional fuel-efficient ovens, food storage solutions, hygienic dry toilets etc..
Bringing that stuff back would have major impact on daily lives and be logical first step of this kind of program.
I'd be more impressed if these types of events weren't just a way for the overly affluent to jet set around trying to justify an overly excessive and unsustainable lifestyle.
Speaking as a planet, we simply can't afford you!
A lot of these nations are poor because the Western nations have invaded, raped, pillaged and destroyed their cultures in pursuit of minerals and precious stones.
England enslaved India not because of their love for the curry, but because they wanted to dominate the spice trade.
Leopold invaded Congo for the rubber (which was derived solely from natural means).
I could go on, but /.'s disk space is probably limited.
I am opposed to the argument that poor people are poor because they are doing something wrong. People can be born wealthy, or they can be born poor. The simple fact is, you can only make use of what your environment offers, and in third world countries, that is not much.
This is why thinking like this is needed. Expensive but efficient technology needs to be commoditised for Third World production to bootstrap their economies.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Circumcision can reduce the HIV/AIDS by a significant percentage. However, access to circumcision and doctors is the problem in third world countries. If MIT could develop a circumcision device that the third world lay person could operate in a safe manner, this would be a big help in reducing HIV/AIDs and the suffering.
Also, there are some of us in the first world that could also use such a device. Circumcision without the embarrassment of a doctor's visit and in the privacy of one's own home. I'd look to get my hands on one to cirucmcise myself at home, and perhaps the first world's use could subsidise the manufacturing costs for the third world.
"What people need is usually completely different from what we imagine sitting here in America," says Jodie Wu
People's needs in foreign countries are different than our own? Unpossible!
Quoting parent:
"movers as shakers of the world (Europe, North America, Korea, Japan and China)"
Thanks a lot you insensitive clod for implying Australia is a third world country.
From Jarod Diamond's point of view the west did not become wealthy because of us doing things "right". It became wealthy purely through geographical luck.
Aarguments have been raised in opposition to his book, but I still think that it is a worthwhile read.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
I'm going to partially side with the parent on this one.
Poor people may be born in poor or hopeless situations, but after listening to what has happened in Zimbabwe with their elections, not to mention the other instances of genocide is just one of the reasons why Africa will never be as influential as the west.
Africa has about 400-500 years of colonial imperialism that has messed up the continent. There is no doubt about it. However it offers no excuse for the warlords and week governments that are there now. The people that are there now are the makers of their own destiny. They can bring about change in their countries if they so want it.
90% of research dollars may be spent on creating technologies that are targeted at the richest 10% of the population, but that doesn't mean they don't benefit the other 90%. Think of mobile phones, for example - originally aimed at the Western business elite, but they went on to revolutionise the African economy by creating a fast, efficient communication network between villages where it wasn't feasible to roll out wired infrastructure.
Well, thats why its called the "Land Down Under".
The unequal distribution of wealth and resources generated in the colonial period has become even more pronounced in the postindustrial or information age. Members of societies with access to good educational opportunities and advanced technology profit far more from the emerging global economy than do members of less developed societies.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Of course, it still doesn't mean that nation being poor means doing something wrong. It may also mean that someone got something right first, at the expense of the others.
a) The wealthiest 10% (referring to the population of the first world) live the way they do because the wealthiest 0.0001% of the world find it profitable to maintain them in a state of fat, mindless consumption.
b) Where do you think your TV, DVD player, cellphone, shoes, socks, PC are manufactured? I guarantee you that the hard labor required to manufacture these goods is not carried out by the fat, lazy people of the first world. They are too busy doing mindless administrative jobs in the office and then asking for time off due to a stubbed toe.
c) Your "survival of the fittest" attitude is a pathetic attempt at rationalizing your own profligate, wasteful and totally unsustainable lifestyle. You're like a child trying to tell yourself that stealing cookies is actually OK. Go travel, realize that the people in the third world actually are people, who work hard for their families and have the same hopes, dreams and ambitions that you have. The only difference between them and you is that their opportunity is undermined by the first world in the name of "profit" and they don't use abhorrent, broken logic to justify their own existence.
I hate printers.
Oh, and
d) The "movers and shakers" of the world would die without the third world nations, but the third world would thrive without the "movers and shakers". If you believe otherwise, you're either deluded and ignorant, or 12 years old. Every rich nation in the world today is only rich riding on the back of cheap labor to produce gigantic amounts of consumer goods to fuel their consumption-dependent economies. Taking away the third world would be taking away factories, plants and workshops. How long do you think the "movers and shakers" would survive without that?
My guess is not very.
I hate printers.
Nearly 90 percent of research and development dollars are spent on creating technologies that serve the wealthiest 10 percent of the world's population
If reversing that is the goal, why only help the third world when it seems that nearly the entire globe is that way?
Twinstiq, game news
Many of the circumcision / HIV studies are flawed (Google "circumcision HIV"). It could even have the opposite effect as circumcised men may be less willing to use a condom because they have less sensitivity.
Circumcision can reduce the HIV/AIDS by a significant percentage. However, access to circumcision and doctors is the problem in third world countries. If MIT could develop a circumcision device that the third world lay person could operate in a safe manner, this would be a big help in reducing HIV/AIDs and the suffering.
Also, there are some of us in the first world that could also use such a device. Circumcision without the embarrassment of a doctor's visit and in the privacy of one's own home. I'd look to get my hands on one to cirucmcise myself at home, and perhaps the first world's use could subsidise the manufacturing costs for the third world.
Have you tried employing the use of a cigar cutter for this? If you heat up the blades, then it can cauterize in the same motion.
Not that I've personally tried this.
For some reason the news office didn't link to D-lab. But there are actually plenty of groups at MIT doing stuff like this,
including the Public Service Center's IDEAS competition, several Mech-E student ptojects, Design for Change,
and the spin-off Design that matters.
These groups work on a lot of interesting things. Some of them, like the Kinkajou projector, see somewhat esoteric or "luxurious,"
but others are pretty basic and nifty. There are a lot of bicycle flywheel-moderated pedal powered devices that seem to fill genuine
needs, as does the famous peanut sheller.
Were that I say, pancakes?
Let's make really cheap, low-cost, useful, and robust devices to help people. Why didn't I think of that! Bet nobody else has thought of that before either!
Thank you for that utterly pointless and irrelevant mini-rant. Now get back in your cave.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Which is why Japan is so poor, right?
People that live in third would countries can choose to work in those factories or continue having the lifestyle of their parents and grandparents. They see working indoors as a plus. It would be wack for me to feel guilty for having been born and programmed in the United States. Do you feel guilt? Do you make up for it by using your computer to blow peoples' minds? Har. Do you have a problem with fat people? Why don't you go build something, skinny?
Every time I open the newspaper, turn on the news, or turn on the radio, I hear about some Third World country with not enough food or water or medicine.
Here is a cheaper, easier way that anyone can do, in any language, and requires no technical expertise:
Step 1) STOP HAVING BABIES!
Step 2) Repeat STEP 1 until a sustainable population is reached.
It sounds harsh and mean, but the main problem is that the populations of the countries is far higher than their current situation can sustain. The fewer people you have, then the less food, water, and medicine you need to sustain them and keep them healthy.
Nobody wants to say it, and someone will inevitably mod this TROLL since they feel that feelings and emotions are more important than logic, but that is the problem: Over-population of places that CANNOT support the large and increaing number of people who depend on insufficient sources of food and water.
Unfortunately, some people don't under stand the simple concept that 3 people consume less than 5, and nobody has the balls to either tell them that, or admit to it.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
is turning into quite a movement.
http://appropedia.org/ is like wikipedia but, predictably, for appropriate technology.
http://hexayurt.com/ is a nice little emergency shelter (that's my project.)
http://globalswadeshi.net/ takes Gandhi's ideas (like the spinning wheel) and generalizes them into a global picture based on appropriate technology innovations
http://akvo.org/ does water technology
http://openfarmtech.org/ does a wide range of systems for a very high standard of living
and there's a lot more out there.
http://www.globalswadeshi.net/video has a series of video interviews with people working on appropriate technology in this general vein.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
Basically, when you run the numbers, it seems like about half of all global death is from poverty.
This talk (I presented it about two weeks ago) gives some details, sketches out possible solutions, and puts the whole thing in context.
http://www.globalswadeshi.net/video/video/show?id=2097821%3AVideo%3A1943
Enjoy.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
The technology is one element of a systemic solution. Go play Warcraft (the original one.) You start out with one grunt. You harvest resources, enhance capabilities, and improve your situation through incremental means. Throughout the process, you've developed an infrastructure that will support your population.
Aw hell! Some bastard sent troops into my Town Square and is tearing the place to shit! Yep, you can expect the local warlord/gang/bunch_of_thugs to do that in the real world as well. You've developed a resource; someone will try to take it from you.
Simply tossing a technological measure at a community won't magically fix things. At a minimum, it'll free up someone to perform another task that wasn't an option before. It's worth doing, but needs to be part of a larger program that helps with developing comprehensive infrastructure.
"The simple fact is, you can only make use of what your environment offers, and in third world countries, that is not much"
Change "environment" to "culture" and you'll be far more accurate.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
On the other hand though, how long do you really think it would before there were mirrors of the "movers and shakers" in the third world as they thrive? There's *always* inequality, the evils you rant against are not simple products of the western world, bear that in mind.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
It's a feature of the deluded, hypocritical, and US-centrically hateful mind to apply the "cultural hegemony" rationalisation for hate in connection with food stores.
Count the number of Starbucks stores in Riyadh. Then count the number of Kebab stores in Hamburg.
Put simply: If you claim it is understandable if a Chinaman burns a Starbucks, but also claim it's intolerable if a European burns down a kebab store or Chinese takeaway, then you suffer from a deficiency of thinking. Reflect and introspect.
Simple linear interpolation proves circumcision reduces HIV:
1. Uncut males may acquire HIV.
2. Remove that nasty wedding tackle at birth: no possibility of future HIV acquistion.
3. Remove X% - reduces HIV risk by some amount.
More studies are needed, but a good start would be the surgical reduction of male penises by various amounts (say 10%, 40%, and 80%.) We could then correlate these reductions with rates of future HIV infection.
Naturally, we should do these studies in Africa because those people have a lot of AIDS, and it's only ethical to help them as much as we can.
1. cheap, reliable electricity generation
2. cheap, reliable air conditioning
Those two things alone would make an unbelievable difference in the lives of pretty much everyone in the Third World.
Clean micro-power would obivate the need for (1) expensive to own/operate gas/diesel generators and (2) large infrastructure investments.
Cheap, reliable air conditioning would benefit both industry (food storage and transportation) and normal life (things really are nicer in AC).
These two would change life radically in the third world...for the better.
This is a relatively regular initiative which has been producing good results on a sporadic basis for decades. At least this has been my experience in Canada. I feel certain that people in many other so-called 'first world' countries have given it a go as well. It would seem, however, that a more durable approach might consist of going to the people in the areas where the need is felt and assisting them to make their own technologies from locally available materials to answer locally felt needs. Not the same ego-boo but immensely more useful. "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for life" (My apologies to the original)
M$ has nothing to do with this effort. I misread the summary.
It's great to see (reading the NY Times article) that this summit includes people from developing countries. Often, these sorts of things just involve people from developed countries dreaming up 'solutions' that sound awesome but wouldn't actually work on the ground, because the focus is only on the technologies and there isn't enough understanding of the people and societies in the developing countries or areas the technology is meant for.
I talked to a volunteer with Engineers Without Borders Canada who had this crazy story about rural villages in Mali (in western Africa). In almost every single town he visited (poor farming villages, actually) there was a deep, covered well and pump providing clean, healthy drinking water. And nobody used them. Instead, women from the villages would walk a few kilometres to collect water from a stagnant, parasite-infected pool of water.
Which seems ridiculous to us, maybe, except that collecting water by the pool was an important social event for these women (that standing in line at the well didn't duplicate at all), and that people thought the metal of the pump was unnatural - especially compared to a water source 'in nature', and that no one had really convinced the families in these villages that water from the pump would make their babies more likely to survive.
But it really goes to show that the best-intended engineering or technical solutions (in this case, a foreign NGO's decision a decade or two ago that every Malian village needed a water pump) won't succeed without a better understanding of the people they are meant to help. And that in the end, developing countries will never "make it" because of solutions 'handed down' by first-world organizations; in the end people there need to be empowered to improve their lives and their countries. First-world organizations can help with that, but we can't pretend to understand their communities' needs better than they do.
So.. every rich nation is rich because they produce a tremendous amount of wealth. How insightful of you. Do you want a ribbon?
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
A neighbour is a senior project manager for a development charity, and his view is that a lot of Africa's problems stem from too few people. Below a certain density you do not have the GNP to develop transport, or the manpower to clear swamps and get rid of malaria (for instance.) This is why most Third World development takes place in crowded cities rather than rural areas.
But as to why you are a troll. One North American baby = nearly 12 African babies in terms of resource consumption. In terms of resource consumption, the US uses as much as a Third World country of around 4 billion people, and the EU probably uses as much as 2-3 billion Third World people. Now do you get it? The answer is for US, you (and to a lesser extent me) to stop having growing populations, not the Third World. Then we don't need to build kleptomaniac corporations that steal all their resources.
The average North American uses twice as much energy as the average Briton or German, and two and a half times as much as the average Italian. Germans and Italians have a pretty good lifestyle; I'd much rather live in Munich, say, than most American cities. New York has almost European population densities and energy efficiency, yet it is a desirable place to live. If you could just drive sensibly, live in adequate but not bloated houses, and stop trying to commute fifty miles each way to work by three tonne truck, you would free up enough energy to make a significant difference to the entire Third World. And then you would not need that huge army and the array of missiles, because nobody would be coming after you.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
ObPlug: Paul Polak's "Out of Poverty" program. http://www.paulpolak.com/ He has a deeper-than-surface understanding of 3rd world micro-economics. He introduced simple but effective technologies in many places which have completely transformed the lives of whole villages. Drip irrigation, cheap water storage, treadle-pumps, etc. He also has a book at amazon. Haven't read it yet, but it's on my wish list.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1576754499/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance
On a related note:
(IMO) our universities must become more than diploma mills for the children of the wealthy, they should (primarily) be incubators for real, functional change. MIT and a few other universities take this seriously and (most importantly) fund it. (See recent articles on break-through solar technology.) I hope they will open-source the fruits of their research.
We somehow need to shift focus from getting-rich-quick to saving a world that needs it. We can't afford to let the 21st century really can't be like the 20th.
What you say is a big amount of bollocks.
I suggest you go visit IN PERSON any such country that you berate 'raped, pillaged, destroyed' by teh eviiiil western nations and see for yourself the real causes of their current state.
That should constitute for you a real eye-opening experience.
Likewise, TechBridgeWorld deserves a plug too. TBW, out of Carnegie Mellon University, has been doing something similar to this group from MIT. They've been at this for years and a number of students have been through the program. It also helps that Carnegie Mellon has a campus in Doha, Qatar.
I wish I hadn't already replied to someone to mod you up. This is very true. Example: Africa. Their situation is caused by a lack of natural resources to begin with (notably, clean water) and governments that come and go.
twitter is bored because all his accounts are ruined and are posting at -1, so he amuses himself with his journal.
The offtopic "M$" thing is also played out with his sockpuppets. To great effect, as usual.
Thank you for that utterly pointless and irrelevant mini-rant. Now get back in your cave.
No need, he (like all of us) is sitting in his mom's basement, which is dark enough already.
Ok, but does it work by making sex less enjoyable, or by making it less risky?
There is no medical benefit to the circumcision itself. There are religious reasons you might have the procedure done, but from what I've heard, if you're already circumcised by an MD, the religious official still has to snip something, so you're not really doing yourself a favor there.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Taking away the third world would be taking away factories, plants and workshops.
Or, they would come back to the first world, and prices would either go up or down (probably the former.)
The "movers and shakers" of the world would die without the third world nations,
What's your next guess?
The first world has vastly higher productivity both industrially and agriculturally. We produce surpluses, while third world countries starve under their local dictators.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
You might want to reflect on your own reading comprehension for a while. Read it again, and then tell me who the author says is actually producing all that wealth. Hint: where is all that "cheap labor" situated?
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
I've lived in the second poorest nation in South America (Paraguay) and visited quite a few more. US policies are the proximate cause for many many of the developing world's troubles.
Quick example: Cotton. The US heavily subsidizes cotton, and then dumps surpluses on the world market for cheaper than Parguayans can grow it. They get trapped in a debt cycle, because they have to use pesticides (made by and loaned by Monsanto) so the cotton grows, and then they have a less than amazing year, and they go into the hole. Their Monsanto contract says they must keep growing cotton until they can pay off the debt.
It's really really ugly. Plenty of places have plenty of problems at their own, but at an absolute minimum, US foreign policy is contributing to their problems (likely substantially).
One of the most difficult problems 3+ World Communities have is the acquiring of fresh water. Another problem is that once fresh water is acquired, others would come and take it, AND the method to make more fresh water. If MIT could find a Low Technology solution to this one issue, then these cultures could work on the next great problem, "Finding a Good Deli."
You are bang on. I live in India and I know what it is like for the poor here. It is not stupidity that keeps them poor - but the fact that poverty significantly reduces their options.
If you are dirt poor and heavily in debt to a few loan sharks, your options are very, very limited. Most people in the third world live under a huge burden of debt and the circumstances that surround it.
So if they fall ill for even a couple of days (and many of these people are daily wage earners), they will stand to lose everything they have because the loan sharks will come and raid their house and take away everything they can lay their hands on.
MIT and many of the western organizations seem to think that it is the lack of information that keeps people poor, or it may be lack of education. But the truth is that it is these organizations who suffer from the lack of accurate information.
I would be interested in seeing some statistics on HIV and circumcision.
As far as I have understood, circumcision does reduce the chance of transmitting HIV during unprotected sex.
The question is just, how much? and, does it matter?
If the reduction is very small, then obviously it matters less. But even if the reduction is moderate (taking the risk of HIV transmission from 10% to 5%), that does not need to mean anything at all in the real world outcome. For example, if a person has 6-10 partners in their lifetime, and with each partner has sex 50 times or more, (six months, every third night?), then a moderate risk reduction may not end up reducing the incidence of HIV majorly.
I would therefore be interested to see some statistics or population modelling on it. I should also say that I am opposed to circumcision of children on principle, because you are removing a part of their body, in a way that makes sex different, without their permission.
The simple fact is, you can only make use of what your environment offers, and in third world countries, that is not much.
That is not much, per head of population. Reduce the head count, and the resources go much further.
Did anyone else read that as "electric free defibrillator"?
I'd say that unaimed or poorly aimed aid is worse than no aid at all. The developing world is utterly saturated with this. The area where I am is a very good example of this. HIV/AIDS money flows like water, and people get paid large amounts of money to attend conferences where they are told to be abstinent in a culture where having only one sexual partner is incomprehensible at best.
The result is that a few people make money off of "aid" and the rest go on with their lives and nothing changes. Hell, I've met more than one person who wanted to get HIV so they could get paid to go give talks a conferences.
I met a researcher from MIT (D-lab) who was actually trying to aim development in a way that would work by working together with the Peace Corps Volunteers who understand the culture better than any other Westerner. I wished her the best of luck, and hope to see good things from them.
And yes, the first world riding on the backs of the poor is the single largest problem to any poor country. If you have it in you to try and stop this, then by all means do it. Most of us aren't built for international courtrooms and even more of us don't want pick up an AK-47.
> Naturally, we should do these studies in Africa because those people have a lot of AIDS, and it's only ethical to help them as much as we can.
By cutting off parts of their bodies? I am rather fond of my unmutilated equipment.
> 2. Remove that nasty wedding tackle at birth: no possibility of future HIV acquistion.
No possibility? You are suggesting that circumsised men have total immunity to sexual transmission of HIV?
Seems a little silly compared to this sort of thing.
Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
The first world produces surpluses?! Have you seen the state of the US federal budget lately?
No net goods importer (as all first world nations are without exception) can be said to produce surplus, by the very definition of the word. The first world only produces a surplus if the word "surplus" is used synonymously with "waste".
I hate printers.
How long before the current economic situation (thanks, GW!) results in the majority of these technologies being needed in the good ole USofA? Is there going to come a day when the rich & affluent citizens of Zimbabwe are sending us cheap bicycle-powered corn shuckers?
Not true in terms of their choice. Economies have changed. In many cases people aren't able to make a living doing what their parents or grandparents did. And "They see working indoors as a plus." Please. I agree with not feeling guilty about where you were born. But we in the First World are lucky and privileged in so many ways which we haven't earned, either. We can work hard and have the best lives we can with what he have to start with, and that's what we can feel good about - because that's what we've done.
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.