South Carolina To Give 1 Laptop Per School Child

ruphus13 sends in an OStatic article outlining the plans of the state of South Carolina, inspired by the One Laptop Per Child project, to provide laptops to local elementary school children. "The South Carolina Department of Education and the non-profit Palmetto Project have teamed up to get a laptop in the hands of every elementary school student in South Carolina... The OLPC/SC hopes to distribute as many as 50,000 laptops this spring to eligible students. The effort is underwritten and managed by the Palmetto Project, whose mission is to 'put new and creative ideas to work in South Carolina.' While low-performing school districts with limited resources are a special focus for the OLPC/SC, the group is adamant on one point: There are no free laptops. In order to receive a laptop, children need to give a small monetary donation — the project coordinators say a dollar or two is sufficient."It's not obvious from browsing around the OLPC/SC site what software the XO laptops will be running; but by following links one gets the impression that they will be powered by Linux, not XP.

Comments

As to Linux vs. XP

[WindBourne]

I am QUITE sure that MS has about 100 ppl already surrounding all the pols and money (millions) is flowing VERY FREELY into re-elect campaign funds.

Just out of curiosity, does anybody know what chair balmer likes? I would like to buy some stock in them.

Re:Please

[AHuxley]

South Africa does not need more computing power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Nuclear_weapons

Growing dependency on the government...

[mi]

Yes, yes, this might sound like a knee-jerk reaction to government doing anything new. It may even seem like a troll. But do consider the history...

First we decided, that all kids are entitled to education — at the taxpayers' expense. Because some poor parents could not (or would not) pay for their children's schooling. It was believed to be an overall win for society, if all its members learned some basics. Ok...

Then we discovered, that getting to free school is a problem for some kids, and school buses got introduced — at taxpayers' expense, of course. Not so obviously Ok...

Then came school breakfasts and/or lunches — hungry children don't learn well somebody figured out. So, we have to feed them, otherwise we'll just be throwing out the money spent on teaching them, wouldn't we? WTF?

Now taxpayers are going to provide kids not only with the schooling itself, with means of getting to school, with food, but also with computers — all using the same illogic , that the State needs to be more worried about the children's well-being and education, than their parents are.

So, where does it stop? Clothing — ought the taxpayers not provide clothes for the pupils, so that nobody skips school for having nothing to wear? Unhappy parents affect children's school performance, no doubt — should the State begin sponsoring all people with school-age children to keep them happy(ier)? The same illogic can take us very far. In fact, it already did — public schools proved to be a "gateway drug". Innocuous in itself they made Americans happy to accept government assistance, which always comes with strings attached... Had the early advocates of them foreseen, how far it would go, they would, likely, not have insisted as much...

That the actual public schools continue to suck, despite gobs of money thrown at them, is not even that important to the point I'm making, although it sure helps support it: Not only is it wrong in principle, it does not actually work...