The number of citations in Science journals says nothing about the quality of one's primary or secondary education. More-over it says nothing about the quality of science or scientific papers published. People, in fact, often reference themselves in their own papers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Of course having these statistics does not show how many foreign born and educated people have since migrated to the US and written journal articles. Your stats may be interesting, but do not prove anything except that the US is number one in citations.
The problem is that people's goals and ideals seem to be out of touch with reality.
Many people have stated that these computers will help solve problems like world hunger, sanitation problems, etc. I really doubt if these computers will solve the social plight of poor people no matter where they live; be it in the third world or East LA.
The one good that can come out of OLPC is that we get cheap rugged computers. The marketing and evangelical fanboyism will just destroy the project.
Most people don't want to buy into a political belief. Sorta like why Democracy Player was changed to Miro; many people just saw that name and thought it was some US marketing tripe.
And btw I am against the eating of Animals. I only eat meat and vegetables.
FYI: I am not religious. I did like the quote though. I would never call myself an atheist however because that would be validating something that does not exist (I.e. one cannot rationally disbelieve in something that does not exist).
People in other countries are unable to grasp how things work here. I wasn't going to make a reply to this particular statement because it is just a tangent to the OLPC topic, but I keep on thinking about what you said, because it is such an interesting statement, and in my experience completely untrue.
In general I have the impression that most non-Americans have a better understanding of America, it's history and politics (both contemporary and historical) then most Americans do. I'm sure this is at least partly do to the "shitty" educational system in the US that you speak of, but at least two other factors are involved:
ONE is that most countries (like Canada for example) are very much influenced by American politics than people may think. Americans keep on threatening economic retaliation, for example, if we do not impose American laws on ourselves (like the DMCA, the draconian War-on-Drugs laws, etc). Every economic disadvantage any trading restrictions would have on the US would be greatly magnified by Canada's relatively small size (economically and population-wise that is).
TWO is that Americans and US politics and history is just soooo incredibly entertaining compared to, let's say, studying the history of the fur trade in Canada (not talking beavers, just fur:P). You people have had the Slave Trade, Uncle Tom's Cabin, Waldon's Pond, Edgar Allen Poe, Charles Manson, Charles Bronson, the continuing saga of the Scopes "monkey" trial and it's related descendants. Almost every presidential change of office means a new US war. You people believe in separation of Church and State and yet have "In God we Trust" on your coinage, and have Congressional prayers. You people are FUCKING WEIRD! (no offense, just a observation) and are full of contradictions; but because of this you are interesting to study. Like amoeba under a microscope, you (the average American that is) may hardly even be self-aware, much less aware of the intense scrutiny you receive from the rest of the world.
I would posit that if Americans knew as much about themselves as the rest of the world does, then this would mean a substantial rise in IQ as compared to what it is now. At least you guys have those comedy talk shows like the Daily Show, where at least some amount of information about the news is filtered out to the average citizen.
Well that's my two Canadian cents. At least they're worth a lot since Bush came into office:)
Thanks for the information. I was aware that Education is not a Federal responsibility in the US, although my understanding is that they have the ability to take over if Federal standards are not met . And the Feds are responsible for the rather political "No Child Left Behind" program to help poor schools (if they obey the agenda of the Republican party, then these schools are supposed to get funding for things like, well, laptops I would presume... considering that laptops are supposed to be vital to a child's educational success according to OLPC evangelists).
I was really just pointing out the irony. I have noticed that people often say and do things with all best intentions, without ever having a clue.
If laptops were so vital to a child's education, then why wouldn't the Federal Government in the US suppply computers to their own schools instead of relying on a charity?
It seems rather bizarre and ironic to me that laptops designed to be used in unfriendly, poverty-sticken environments is being marketed at one of the richest countries in the world.
The last time I checked, Nicholas Negroponte was not placing people on reservations or in gulags. He wants to give kids something that will help them enter an industrial economy or an information economy if they choose to use it. If they don't choose to use it and want to be subsistence farmers, then more power to them. The project isn't about force or coercion. It's about giving people a chance at something they had little chance at before, and they're free to turn that down. I wasn't talking about Negroponte. I was talking about you and your racist language towards the people who don't meat up to your ideals of an industrialized lifestyle. This is what Rodyard Kipling called "The White Man's Burden"... It's the same racist tripe. In Canada we tried to assimilate them as well.
People never cease to amaze me. Instead of just admitting they are wrong, they make excuses for their belief systems. It almost seems as if everybody was born to be a politician.
Do the world a favour and stop condescending to people you don't know or understand.
These people don't NEED missionaries: whether they be religeous, economic OR political. When you say that Negroponte wants to help them be industrialized your ingnorance and cruelty is shining through. Do these people a favour and leave them alone.
I can assure you that turning the egalitarian subsistance farming community (you speak of) into a bunch of landless factory surfs is not going to make their lives better. You obviously haven't worked on an assembly line (I have). And I can assure you the industrialized life in the third world is quite a lot harsher than it is in the West. I am sure these people will hear about all the "advantages" of being exploited. You obviously haven't read the history of the VERY many ubiquitous efforts to "help" these un-industrialized people's "improve" themselves. Take your racism elsewhere... and tell your other Slashdot friends about what a crazy clued-out freak I am.
This so-called choice you speak of is illusionary... When they are being constantly pressured by religeous and economic evangelists like yourself that they are living in ignorance (without libraries and OLAP computers)... and that their lives would be better if they listened to the White Western Corp (OLAP, or what-have-you)... this is old news... VERY old news.
The more replies I get back about the OLAP program... the more negative it appears to be. I have went from neutral to negative on OLAP. I would like to thank the Slashdot community for educating me.
Sim City and all the Sim games worked very well on my High Res black and white Mac Plus. When I tried the Windows versions, in colour no less, they looked and felt so cheap and amateurish (back in the DOS and Windows 3.1 days).
The Mac seemed such a natural platform for Maxis in those days.
I think your looking at it as a cure-all No it is certainly not ME who is thinking of OLPC as a cure-all:)
I'm sorry I never took Sociology or Econ but with a passing knowledge in it, I did read the wikipedia article but the only thing I got from it was people graduating from college at a rate higher then high-skills job creation makes competition stiffer raising the minimum bar. Don't see how computers factor into that except increasing the competitors? As an American that may be bad but as a citizen of the world, may the best/smartest man/woman win. I will spell it out: a) You and others have said outright or implied that OLPC will help with employment b) Inflation is the concept that where you have more of something, it becomes less valuable (i.e. having more overall money doesn't increase the amount of natural gas in the ground, so money becomes less valuable). The same concept is applied with education. People are making all sorts of grandiose claims about OLPC, but are neglecting to realize the basic economic concepts of inflation. If people implementing a program without even attempting to learn about the consequences of what they are implementing (economic consequences or otherwise)... then this is just plain stupid.
It is like the people who introduce new species of animal into an ecosystem to solve a pest problem... thus creating a new problem. People who don't Plan are called Managers. They will always win arguments and make more money than me. But deep down inside they will realize that they care more about their ego than about their shallow belief system.
Remember: I am not attacking OLPC. I am attacking poor arguments and faulty assumptions. I think OLPC is a good idea... just don't give me any grandiose belief systems along with it. (I'm not so much thinking of you pinkocommie, but some of the more radical and imaginative ideas that people make up in their imaginations and believe to be reality).
Third Point: I think your missing the point. Having a computer won't do diddly squat, heck even I started off massively gaming. But being able to cut down the cost of acquiring books to near zero will help a lot. Being able to see animations of say bio stuff (how the heart pumps blood etc etc) will allow people to understand stuff better , pique and retain their interest. It's simply a tool to lower cost and increase the amount of information available. Whether it's used @ all or wasted is obviously up to the individual using it. I may have missed the point. But you argued that your marks in computer class dramatically increased. Thus there is an obvious implication in your statement that you believe that computers will be able to inherently increase GPA, for example.
Fourth Point: I haven't read much about it nor have you provided anything actually backing up what you said? Especially don't get how computers have anything to do with it except perhaps increasing the total pool of smart people out there. This was one of the most important points. I backed up what I said through the Wikipedia article (granted I could have done better... but it's a fairly common and well-known concept in Economics and Sociology.)... In this case deduction itself should suffice, as I was merely trying to make you aware of the concept, and not search for and supply statistics and their various interpretations (That's what the reference section in Wikipedia is for).
Fifth Point: Again no one is saying they'll solve social issues You are wrong about this one. You yourself imply that it has helped you find employment (which is a social issue)... and has helped you in the class stratified society of Pakistan (another social issue). Yes a computer in this case has helped YOU deal with the symptoms of your society, but it has not solved the underlying problem.
And if you look at the very many rebuttals I have received, there are many people who believe that cheap computers will solve social issues like poverty. As someone rebutted: "we've equipped them to drive themselves into the next generation of social and technical excellence."
Yes, one person even said that OLPC computers will solve health care issues. Another said they will solve third world hunger.
It's these type of fallacies that I am pointing out. For some reason, people, instead of acknowledging them, just seem to be getting defensive and using poor arguments to backup their belief system.
I think you make a better case than most, but still... As my original post stated:
Don't get me wrong, I am certainly in favour of cheap computers, especially for poor people, but people should realize WHY they want this, and the reality of their ideals.
McDonald's UK CEO Blames Video Games for Childhood Obesity I have no indication that the CEO of McDonald's is an obesity scientist. I suppose he's thinking that since he has the title of CEO that there is some credibility to anything he says. I suppose there is for quite a lot of people. It's sad.
I wasn't going to reply to this post until I noticed you got modded Insightful. Though I do appreciate your post, I think now is the time to inform.
First point I'll make is that anecdotal evidence is pretty much unconsidered here on Slash (I know this fact intimately... as I always get blasted for it). Of course it's not completely worthless, and can be informative.
Second point is having cheap computers will not make going to the local library any easier or cheaper. Nor will computers (cheap or otherwise) solve the social and political problems in Pakistan or elsewhere that you speak of.
Third point is having cheap computers does not increase ones grade point average. Again anecdotal evidence does not mean cause and effect. One could use the comparison of Japan vs the USA: Japan does not rely on computers for teaching as compared to the USA, but Japanese students always do better in school than US students.
Fourth point: Computers do NOT increase employability. What computers do (as used as educational instruments) is increase the rate of educational inflation.
Fifth point: The introduction of these cheap educational computers will only help level the socio-economic playing field ONLY if EVERYBODY in the community got them, otherwise it will just increase social stratification... much like with the libraries in the rich neighbourhoods in Pakistan.
Of course, I fully expect the political zealots to help their agenda by claiming or implying that I am against cheap computers or the OLPC which is of course not the case. What I am against is faulty assumptions and bad logic. Yes, the type of Logic that Managers and Administrators and Politicians and the like use everyday.
As someone who was in the top 5 percent of my class, who spent 3 years and BIG time bucks going to a modern Western school to learn programming and IT... I can assure you that education plays VERY little in actually getting a job. The closest thing I ever got to IT was doing VERY lame phone support... and the people who became the Managers were the same thoughtless illogical people who just barely passed their courses in school, but can get Insightful ratings on their Slashdot accounts and employment reviews. Nope... computers cannot solve social issues. Period!
But it does fall in line with my past modding experience. When I try for informative/insightful I usually get modded 'funny'. When I try for funny I get 'troll' or 'flamebait'.
And apparently when I talk out of my arse without the facts, I get 'interesting'. Go figure.
When you post, tell us specifically if it is a 'funny' post or an 'arse' post etc... so we can moderate appropriately.
BTW, all my posts are Insightful unless otherwise stipulated.
What phone are they going to use to reserve the book? With what light will they read it after the sun goes down? How are they going to travel 100 miles on foot to the "local library"? I don't know.
Many of the people targeted with the XO are not living in clean rows of houses with white fences but with no computers. They're living in places where subsistence farming and odd jobs are the employment. They're happy to have clean water and vaccinations, some clothes and maybe some shoes. I presumed that these computers would probably be targeted at subsistence farmers, amongst others.
You don't send these people to the local school library, where there might be 5 books for the village in the one-room school. I would not send them anywhere. I also would certainly not discourage people from going to the library, however far away it may be.
Imagine putting 30 computers in a small village that has one phone for those 30 kids and their families. Now, imagine all the computers can talk to one another, and that another, coordinating charity is putting a 256k or 512k Internet line in for the village. You're talking about not just changing the source of connectivity and reading material. You're talking about introducing those things. The "charity" you speak of is almost ALWAYS pure racism and colonialism. Of course I cannot speak for the OLPC or every project I hear about... but it sounds more like colonialism than it does about helping them. The concept of "Poverty" and wealth itself may be very different in those communities. Of course, generally speaking most of the "poverty" that indigenous people's have suffered from are the result of "charity".
I'm having the feeling that NOBODY on Slashdot has EVER read a history book, an Economics book, or any Social Science book what-so-ever. I am not saying you are WRONG about anything... but at the very least I am highly skeptical. I am sorry that more people are not... skepticism helps stop people from making mistakes; and helps people to think through solutions more diligently.
Yeah I can imagine a room full of poor natives talking to each other in a room full of OLPC computers... That reminds me of an article I read (can't remember... but it was a real life article in a University Library)... about some tribe that was "discovered" in South America. They took this tribe to the big city... flew them in their military jets... really treated them like Kings and Queens, and showed them how superior they were and that they wanted to civilize and educate them to be part of their world. This uncivilized tribe that was living hand-to-mouth subsistence in the jungles of South America basically said no thanks and went back to being poor hunters and gatherers. I can't remember the tribe.... and I really haven't been following those issues for years (it depresses me too much)... but I know, most people make it sound good to destroy people's way of living and force them to work as cheap labour on lands that they once owned.... Yeah I guess most people on Slashdot think I'm some fucked up creature. So be it.. It's just my two cents...
Educational and hobbyist computers help drive an understanding and thirst for applying computing technology in other applications. Or are you expecting all these technical advances to always come from outside the countries that could benefit from them? I have no expectations, but in this case they are coming from "outside" countries. And in all probability they always will. I have yet to see a semi-conductor company build a chip fabrication plant in Canada, so I doubt if I would see one in a politically volatile area like central Africa. Right here where I live (in the "developed" world, I know many computer Geeks who are un / under-employed... not much good it did them for employment anyways.
Yeah I guess I'm pretty old school. I don't believe technology is a panacea to world hunger, or educating third world kids with computers so they can get jobs as Mechanical Turks doing captcha's for spammers and crackers; is necessarily a good thing that will improve their quality of life.
Yes, there quality of life COULD be improved, but considering the unconsidered posts to this thread, it seems like more regard will be placed on the technological "solution" than to the people.
Call me an idealist, but thinking in the longer term, having an educated population with the capability to compete on more level terms with the developed world is relevant. You didn't seem to understand my reply. Perhaps I was not articulate enough. My point was more in the realm of Planning and Management; which involves, among other things, figuring out the pros and cons. I can only surmise that people who have a technology fixation have a very limited and unrealistic perspective. You seem to be making a false assumption that I am against OLPC, which I am not.
I think one thing that can be said however, is that computer technology does not make people smarter. It is a GREAT tool to have, and I wish everybody would have one, but it does not make people smart, and it will not solve poverty in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th worlds. The personal computer is over-rated in the personal "productivity" area.
I have pretty much explained this in my various posts to this thread (so I will not repeat myself here). You may if you wish, consult the latest posts on my Homepage if you wish: (http://slashdot.org/~unlametheweak/)
But who am I to oppose you? I have no idea why you or anybody else would want to oppose me.
You don't solve world poverty by dumping all our resources at the poor. You "solve" world poverty by pushing everyone forward, by teaching. When people over yonder can figure out how to start farming properly, how to give themselves the nutrients we need, they won't need our help. They'll soon be shooting far and wide, and will be self-sufficient. "You don't solve world poverty by dumping all our resources at the poor." Yes of course... There are many thousands of other ways you do not solve world poverty.
You "solve" world poverty by pushing everyone forward, by teaching. Interesting, but how does teaching somebody about the "chinook" effect , for example solve world poverty.
When people over yonder can figure out how to start farming properly, how to give themselves the nutrients we need, they won't need our help. That is just racist tripe. People do not need the White Western Corporation to teach them how to properly feed themselves. They need the Western Corporation to stop funding corrupt governments and insurgent groups, and preferably spending some time and money giving the land back to the people that these technologically superior "farmers" took from them. Maybe that would help to solve the poverty issues in much of Africa, Asia and South America.
It really offends me when people who have no knowledge of the world make up their own theories about how other people should live.
But without computers they're going to be kept out of a vast amount of the economy, and that will almost certainly assure that they're poor. They aren't a guarantee of anything, but they seem quite absolutely necessary as a starting condition to have much of a shot at all. This is a rather bizarre thing to say, especially since you offer ZERO evidence for this statement. If you are talking about introducing technologies to people... then this has historically led to poverty and social and economic stratification of a society. It may or may not introduce them to the world economy in some marginal sense.. but if it does, they will likely experience the results of exploitation rather than quality-of-life improvements. One could argue rather bogus economic concepts like Standard of Living, or GDP, (they're bogus in THIS context because they are Western measures of a Western market economy)... Standard of Living, for example is merely an equation that involves GDP.... So you have a whole lot of faulty assumptions like the US has a really high Standard of Living because they spend so much on War and Natural disasters which in turn causes there GDP (spending) to go up and hence their Standard of Living equation has improved. Really bogus in the sense that the quality of life for most poor and many middle class people in Western countries, but in particular the US really sucks BIG TIME. So no, even in the US having the likes of Quad-core gaming machines hasn't necessarily decreased poverty (in fact I think poverty in the US has increased with processor speed... but I'd need to verify that).
but computers have contributed real productivity gains to the U.S. economy Perhaps I didn't explain well enough, but when I was talking about "computers", I was talking in the vain of Personal Computers, and NOT computers used in industry. I was really meaning personal computers like the OLPC computers discussed in the article. Personal computers that are used in home and in school.
I was not talking about large mainframe computers, telephones switching systems, industrial robots, etc. And I wanted to emphasize the AVERAGE person, and not the entrepreneurs, for example. Sorry for not making myself clearer. Obviously I make assumptions too; but I try not too. I hope I made myself clear on what I was talking about.
$75 per child might get you a school library of a couple thousand books, but wouldn't you rather give them all of Wikipedia and Project Gutenberg? That's not the point. It's the naivety and ethnocentrism which Quadraginta is pointing out.
For example, can you tell me what the negative consequences are of sending laptops to, let's say, Nigeria?
Or, can you tell me the relevance of having access to the complete works of Wikipedia versus getting Polio vaccinations, or vitamin supplements?
Can you tell me that these computers will actually even get into the hands of the "poor" people, or will this just be treated the same as food-aide by the man-made famines in Africa, where the governments, warlords, etc, take the food and resells it to the highest bidder.
I really doubt most people think beyond there own simple perspectives, and hence people like Quadraginta get modded down simply because people do not understand what he/she is saying, so they just assume that person is being a Troll, etc.
I'm sure a lot of people are assuming that I'm against OLPC simply because I bring up these common-sense points. Of course that could be farthest from the truth.
Fact is giving cheap computers to "poor" nations does not make them any happier, healthier, richer, or more educated. It just means that they have cheap computers. It may change the social dynamics around a bit, like reading a book at home on a computer instead of at the local school or library. It may even mean that somebody may get to work for IBM as a programmer through one of their off-shoring initiatives.
At any rate, since computers started to become superfluous in the West I have NOT noticed that people became more educated, happy, employed, etc (I'm sure those ppl still making big $$$ in the IT field would disagree). Yep, a shift in jobs for some people, and easier to do some second-hand research; but overall (unless you are a Gamer) I wouldn't say it has had a dramatic effect (for the better) on people's lives.
Don't get me wrong, I am certainly in favour of cheap computers, especially for poor people, but people should realize WHY they want this, and the reality of their ideals.
Google's early success was in building a pared-down, uncluttered and effective search engine portal, with a really damned good link-in to advertising. While everyone else was making their main pages cluttered monstrosities where the advertising they were selling was sublimated into news and interest garbage, making their pages incredibly difficult to read and use, Google figured out that the real secret was the other way around. They very much were "Our job is to search sites for you. You know how to go to your news page or your entertainment page, and we don't need to do that for you." Yes that's one of the things I was thinking about when posting. Perhaps I should have articulated that point. Larry Page fought for Google being the simple site (on the front end that is) that it is today when asking investors to finance his company (without the picture ads and portal style pages of then leaders like Yahoo). It's the thinking behind Google that makes it innovative, and not just the product itself.
That aside, I see Microsoft as a company that's losing direction by pulling itself in too many at once. The company seems to be Hell-bent on conquering every corner of their market, and then any markets they hadn't originally targeted. Yes, and that is called being a conglomerate. When the growth in your primary market has topped out (compared to the 1990s at least), you seek for growth elsewhere (like acquiring companies). It's the best way to ensure that executives keep their jobs. It means nothing for the consumer however.
I understand that I was being fecisious. I understood your comment as being facetious as well. I thought I'd add my two cents because I doubt if most people realize what a serious threat Google is to Microsoft. IIRC, when Bill Gates first learned that Google was prospecting for people who had experience in programming operating systems, his response was something like "Holy shit!"
And yes their lack of innovation is astounding. Google's success was through innovation, and so they continue to innovate. Microsoft's success was through taking ideas (and companies) from other's and then dominating the market. It's nice to see some real competition out there.
Slashdot Mirror
The number of citations in Science journals says nothing about the quality of one's primary or secondary education. More-over it says nothing about the quality of science or scientific papers published. People, in fact, often reference themselves in their own papers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Of course having these statistics does not show how many foreign born and educated people have since migrated to the US and written journal articles. Your stats may be interesting, but do not prove anything except that the US is number one in citations.
The problem is that people's goals and ideals seem to be out of touch with reality.
Many people have stated that these computers will help solve problems like world hunger, sanitation problems, etc. I really doubt if these computers will solve the social plight of poor people no matter where they live; be it in the third world or East LA.
The one good that can come out of OLPC is that we get cheap rugged computers. The marketing and evangelical fanboyism will just destroy the project.
Most people don't want to buy into a political belief.
Sorta like why Democracy Player was changed to Miro; many people just saw that name and thought it was some US marketing tripe.
And btw I am against the eating of Animals. I only eat meat and vegetables.
FYI: I am not religious. I did like the quote though.
I would never call myself an atheist however because that would be validating something that does not exist (I.e. one cannot rationally disbelieve in something that does not exist).
My advice:
Don't believe everything you read.
In general I have the impression that most non-Americans have a better understanding of America, it's history and politics (both contemporary and historical) then most Americans do. I'm sure this is at least partly do to the "shitty" educational system in the US that you speak of, but at least two other factors are involved:
ONE is that most countries (like Canada for example) are very much influenced by American politics than people may think. Americans keep on threatening economic retaliation, for example, if we do not impose American laws on ourselves (like the DMCA, the draconian War-on-Drugs laws, etc). Every economic disadvantage any trading restrictions would have on the US would be greatly magnified by Canada's relatively small size (economically and population-wise that is).
TWO is that Americans and US politics and history is just soooo incredibly entertaining compared to, let's say, studying the history of the fur trade in Canada (not talking beavers, just fur
You people have had the Slave Trade, Uncle Tom's Cabin, Waldon's Pond, Edgar Allen Poe, Charles Manson, Charles Bronson, the continuing saga of the Scopes "monkey" trial and it's related descendants. Almost every presidential change of office means a new US war. You people believe in separation of Church and State and yet have "In God we Trust" on your coinage, and have Congressional prayers. You people are FUCKING WEIRD! (no offense, just a observation) and are full of contradictions; but because of this you are interesting to study. Like amoeba under a microscope, you (the average American that is) may hardly even be self-aware, much less aware of the intense scrutiny you receive from the rest of the world.
I would posit that if Americans knew as much about themselves as the rest of the world does, then this would mean a substantial rise in IQ as compared to what it is now. At least you guys have those comedy talk shows like the Daily Show, where at least some amount of information about the news is filtered out to the average citizen.
Well that's my two Canadian cents. At least they're worth a lot since Bush came into office
Thanks for the information. I was aware that Education is not a Federal responsibility in the US, although my understanding is that they have the ability to take over if Federal standards are not met . And the Feds are responsible for the rather political "No Child Left Behind" program to help poor schools (if they obey the agenda of the Republican party, then these schools are supposed to get funding for things like, well, laptops I would presume... considering that laptops are supposed to be vital to a child's educational success according to OLPC evangelists).
I was really just pointing out the irony. I have noticed that people often say and do things with all best intentions, without ever having a clue.
If laptops were so vital to a child's education, then why wouldn't the Federal Government in the US suppply computers to their own schools instead of relying on a charity?
It seems rather bizarre and ironic to me that laptops designed to be used in unfriendly, poverty-sticken environments is being marketed at one of the richest countries in the world.
People never cease to amaze me. Instead of just admitting they are wrong, they make excuses for their belief systems. It almost seems as if everybody was born to be a politician.
Do the world a favour and stop condescending to people you don't know or understand.
These people don't NEED missionaries: whether they be religeous, economic OR political. When you say that Negroponte wants to help them be industrialized your ingnorance and cruelty is shining through. Do these people a favour and leave them alone.
I can assure you that turning the egalitarian subsistance farming community (you speak of) into a bunch of landless factory surfs is not going to make their lives better. You obviously haven't worked on an assembly line (I have). And I can assure you the industrialized life in the third world is quite a lot harsher than it is in the West. I am sure these people will hear about all the "advantages" of being exploited. You obviously haven't read the history of the VERY many ubiquitous efforts to "help" these un-industrialized people's "improve" themselves. Take your racism elsewhere... and tell your other Slashdot friends about what a crazy clued-out freak I am.
This so-called choice you speak of is illusionary... When they are being constantly pressured by religeous and economic evangelists like yourself that they are living in ignorance (without libraries and OLAP computers)... and that their lives would be better if they listened to the White Western Corp (OLAP, or what-have-you)... this is old news... VERY old news.
The more replies I get back about the OLAP program... the more negative it appears to be. I have went from neutral to negative on OLAP. I would like to thank the Slashdot community for educating me.
Sim City and all the Sim games worked very well on my High Res black and white Mac Plus. When I tried the Windows versions, in colour no less, they looked and felt so cheap and amateurish (back in the DOS and Windows 3.1 days).
The Mac seemed such a natural platform for Maxis in those days.
a) You and others have said outright or implied that OLPC will help with employment
b) Inflation is the concept that where you have more of something, it becomes less valuable (i.e. having more overall money doesn't increase the amount of natural gas in the ground, so money becomes less valuable).
The same concept is applied with education. People are making all sorts of grandiose claims about OLPC, but are neglecting to realize the basic economic concepts of inflation. If people implementing a program without even attempting to learn about the consequences of what they are implementing (economic consequences or otherwise)... then this is just plain stupid.
It is like the people who introduce new species of animal into an ecosystem to solve a pest problem... thus creating a new problem. People who don't Plan are called Managers. They will always win arguments and make more money than me. But deep down inside they will realize that they care more about their ego than about their shallow belief system.
Remember:
I am not attacking OLPC. I am attacking poor arguments and faulty assumptions. I think OLPC is a good idea... just don't give me any grandiose belief systems along with it. (I'm not so much thinking of you pinkocommie, but some of the more radical and imaginative ideas that people make up in their imaginations and believe to be reality).
And if you look at the very many rebuttals I have received, there are many people who believe that cheap computers will solve social issues like poverty. As someone rebutted:
"we've equipped them to drive themselves into the next generation of social and technical excellence."
Yes, one person even said that OLPC computers will solve health care issues. Another said they will solve third world hunger.
It's these type of fallacies that I am pointing out. For some reason, people, instead of acknowledging them, just seem to be getting defensive and using poor arguments to backup their belief system.
I think you make a better case than most, but still...
As my original post stated: Don't get me wrong, I am certainly in favour of cheap computers, especially for poor people, but people should realize WHY they want this, and the reality of their ideals.
I suppose he's thinking that since he has the title of CEO that there is some credibility to anything he says. I suppose there is for quite a lot of people.
It's sad.
I'm running out of tinfoil.
I wasn't going to reply to this post until I noticed you got modded Insightful. Though I do appreciate your post, I think now is the time to inform.
First point I'll make is that anecdotal evidence is pretty much unconsidered here on Slash (I know this fact intimately... as I always get blasted for it). Of course it's not completely worthless, and can be informative.
Second point is having cheap computers will not make going to the local library any easier or cheaper. Nor will computers (cheap or otherwise) solve the social and political problems in Pakistan or elsewhere that you speak of.
Third point is having cheap computers does not increase ones grade point average. Again anecdotal evidence does not mean cause and effect. One could use the comparison of Japan vs the USA: Japan does not rely on computers for teaching as compared to the USA, but Japanese students always do better in school than US students.
Fourth point:
Computers do NOT increase employability. What computers do (as used as educational instruments) is increase the rate of educational inflation.
Fifth point:
The introduction of these cheap educational computers will only help level the socio-economic playing field ONLY if EVERYBODY in the community got them, otherwise it will just increase social stratification... much like with the libraries in the rich neighbourhoods in Pakistan.
Of course, I fully expect the political zealots to help their agenda by claiming or implying that I am against cheap computers or the OLPC which is of course not the case. What I am against is faulty assumptions and bad logic. Yes, the type of Logic that Managers and Administrators and Politicians and the like use everyday.
As someone who was in the top 5 percent of my class, who spent 3 years and BIG time bucks going to a modern Western school to learn programming and IT... I can assure you that education plays VERY little in actually getting a job. The closest thing I ever got to IT was doing VERY lame phone support... and the people who became the Managers were the same thoughtless illogical people who just barely passed their courses in school, but can get Insightful ratings on their Slashdot accounts and employment reviews. Nope... computers cannot solve social issues. Period!
When you post, tell us specifically if it is a 'funny' post or an 'arse' post etc... so we can moderate appropriately.
BTW, all my posts are Insightful unless otherwise stipulated.
Thanks for your cooperation,
UTW
I'm having the feeling that NOBODY on Slashdot has EVER read a history book, an Economics book, or any Social Science book what-so-ever. I am not saying you are WRONG about anything... but at the very least I am highly skeptical. I am sorry that more people are not... skepticism helps stop people from making mistakes; and helps people to think through solutions more diligently.
Yeah I can imagine a room full of poor natives talking to each other in a room full of OLPC computers... That reminds me of an article I read (can't remember... but it was a real life article in a University Library)... about some tribe that was "discovered" in South America. They took this tribe to the big city... flew them in their military jets... really treated them like Kings and Queens, and showed them how superior they were and that they wanted to civilize and educate them to be part of their world. This uncivilized tribe that was living hand-to-mouth subsistence in the jungles of South America basically said no thanks and went back to being poor hunters and gatherers. I can't remember the tribe.... and I really haven't been following those issues for years (it depresses me too much)... but I know, most people make it sound good to destroy people's way of living and force them to work as cheap labour on lands that they once owned.... Yeah I guess most people on Slashdot think I'm some fucked up creature. So be it.. It's just my two cents...
Regards,
UTW
Yeah I guess I'm pretty old school. I don't believe technology is a panacea to world hunger, or educating third world kids with computers so they can get jobs as Mechanical Turks doing captcha's for spammers and crackers; is necessarily a good thing that will improve their quality of life.
Yes, there quality of life COULD be improved, but considering the unconsidered posts to this thread, it seems like more regard will be placed on the technological "solution" than to the people.
I think one thing that can be said however, is that computer technology does not make people smarter. It is a GREAT tool to have, and I wish everybody would have one, but it does not make people smart, and it will not solve poverty in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th worlds. The personal computer is over-rated in the personal "productivity" area.
I have pretty much explained this in my various posts to this thread (so I will not repeat myself here). You may if you wish, consult the latest posts on my Homepage if you wish: (http://slashdot.org/~unlametheweak/)
Yes of course... There are many thousands of other ways you do not solve world poverty. You "solve" world poverty by pushing everyone forward, by teaching. Interesting, but how does teaching somebody about the "chinook" effect , for example solve world poverty. When people over yonder can figure out how to start farming properly, how to give themselves the nutrients we need, they won't need our help. That is just racist tripe. People do not need the White Western Corporation to teach them how to properly feed themselves. They need the Western Corporation to stop funding corrupt governments and insurgent groups, and preferably spending some time and money giving the land back to the people that these technologically superior "farmers" took from them. Maybe that would help to solve the poverty issues in much of Africa, Asia and South America.
It really offends me when people who have no knowledge of the world make up their own theories about how other people should live.
Regards,
UTW
I was not talking about large mainframe computers, telephones switching systems, industrial robots, etc. And I wanted to emphasize the AVERAGE person, and not the entrepreneurs, for example. Sorry for not making myself clearer. Obviously I make assumptions too; but I try not too. I hope I made myself clear on what I was talking about.
Sincerely,
ULTW
For example, can you tell me what the negative consequences are of sending laptops to, let's say, Nigeria?
Or, can you tell me the relevance of having access to the complete works of Wikipedia versus getting Polio vaccinations, or vitamin supplements?
Can you tell me that these computers will actually even get into the hands of the "poor" people, or will this just be treated the same as food-aide by the man-made famines in Africa, where the governments, warlords, etc, take the food and resells it to the highest bidder.
I really doubt most people think beyond there own simple perspectives, and hence people like Quadraginta get modded down simply because people do not understand what he/she is saying, so they just assume that person is being a Troll, etc.
I'm sure a lot of people are assuming that I'm against OLPC simply because I bring up these common-sense points. Of course that could be farthest from the truth.
Fact is giving cheap computers to "poor" nations does not make them any happier, healthier, richer, or more educated. It just means that they have cheap computers. It may change the social dynamics around a bit, like reading a book at home on a computer instead of at the local school or library. It may even mean that somebody may get to work for IBM as a programmer through one of their off-shoring initiatives.
At any rate, since computers started to become superfluous in the West I have NOT noticed that people became more educated, happy, employed, etc (I'm sure those ppl still making big $$$ in the IT field would disagree). Yep, a shift in jobs for some people, and easier to do some second-hand research; but overall (unless you are a Gamer) I wouldn't say it has had a dramatic effect (for the better) on people's lives.
Don't get me wrong, I am certainly in favour of cheap computers, especially for poor people, but people should realize WHY they want this, and the reality of their ideals.
http://www.google.com/linux
And yes their lack of innovation is astounding.
Google's success was through innovation, and so they continue to innovate.
Microsoft's success was through taking ideas (and companies) from other's and then dominating the market. It's nice to see some real competition out there.