They do not need: money wasted on what random first-worlders thing third worlders need.
The education ministries of the countries receiving the laptops make an affirmative decision on buying them, no one is forcing them on them. I don't think those people count as random first-worlders. Random first-worlders were willing to pledge for a few thousand, with a total price in the hundreds of thousands of US $, the education ministries of developing countries have already committed to buying over 5 million with a total cost near US$1 billion.
Looks to me like the real interest in this project is from the countries that would be getting the computers, not random first-worlders.
But thanks for your opinion on people in developing nations need. I'm sure your opinion is somehow better than that of a "random first-worlder".
We in rich countries don't give laptops to every one of our kids, yet we seem to think we can tell poor countries that this is what they need.
Um, no. Some people believe, after studying the situation, that this would help developing countries, so they set up a project where developing countries are able to buy inexpensive laptops. No one is forcing these on developing countries against those nation's will. It's the education ministries of the countries involved that make the decision.
I think of a dozen things that would benefit the poor way before we start thinking about fucking PCs.
Yeah, well, good for you. You are welcome to start a project to provide any of those dozens of things, and to try to convince people to donate to and work on your project, and to try to convince developing nations that what you are providing is something they need.
The near-4000 benefactors of the triple-pledge is what most non-profits would consider exceptional pledges. Why wouldn't they accept, or at least make it easy to accept, $100 plus whatever else you want to give towards helping someone?
Remember, OLPC rejected this idea out of hand, it was an independent third-party effort. The total volume (300,000 units) it would have represented with 100,000 pledges would have been lower than the minimum order they are taking from national governments (which is 1 million units), and the $100 target price (which is lower than what the first governments are paying) is based on dealing with that scale of orders with national governments.
OLPC isn't even seeking cash donations from individual donors, as far as I can tell.
They aren't asking for any kind of donations except work on their content and software, really.
Actually, considerably more; Libya's total commitment is something like $250 million, from published sources (early adopters are, as it always goes, paying a bit of a premium).
This was a charity drive to get them to people whose governments *weren't* buying them.
A charity drive, it must be remembered, rejected by the actual OLPC project, which is only selling to national governments, and then in lots not less than 1 million units.
(OTOH, Libya's apparently also discussed buying them for poorer countries, as well, which is the kind of charity OLPC will work with.)
Any first world country hasn't gotten rid of textbooks yet.
First world countries have well-established textbook industries and effective distribution infrastructure for books, etc. Electronic distribution enables a developing country to get information out in ways that circumvent the often poor physical infrastructure (SES Global's pledge of free satellite access for OLPC plus development of downlink stations designed for rural village is a big factor, here, for OLPC.) n
Developing countries don't face identical challenges to developed countries, so the best course for them often isn't the same as the best course in developed countries.
And that is the problem. As long as you accept different needs, you're not bringing the 3rd world countries into the warmth.
I don't know what you mean by "warmth", but accepting the reality that the developing world does not have the same current needs as the developed world does now, nor the same needs that the developing world had in the past, but rather a set of needs that in part overlap each of those and in part are completely distinct is, well, just that: accepting reality.
Not accepting reality isn't going to help developing countries develop better.
You're working towards bringing them to a standard we abandoned a long time ago, instead of working towards bringing them to what we will be at.
No, actually, that's exactly backwards. Trying to force the developed world to use solutions adapted to the present state of the developed world, or trying to force it into the path the presently developed world took in the past, won't work to bring them to where we will be at. OTOH, finding solutions that address their current situation is the only way to help them to develop out of that situation.
In a few years, their kids shouldn't be able to compete against their even poorer and more backwards neighbours, they should be able to compete with us. Inventing a different and lesser "need" is a good way of ensuring this won't happen.
Its not a "lesser" need, its just different. And its different because their conditions are different, and they aren't going to get from a different starting point than we're at to a similar goal to where we're going by following the same route. They need a different route that addresses where they are starting. OLPC and related things (like the SES Global satellite downlink for rural villages that is being developed to accompany OLPC) are ways of getting forward from where they are now.
Your "the way forward is to pretend the developing world is just like the West with the same current needs" approach is more imperialist than recognizign reality is.
9/11 happened because we couldn't get different agencies and intelligence communities to work together.
If by "different intelligence agencies" you mean, for instance, the FBI and the FBI (no, that's not a typo), you are correct.
9/11 happened, despite things that should have been caught by the government, because existing intelligence and law enforcement agencies didn't effectively use the information and legal authority they had. Blaming it on poor coordination is largely a way to avoid any personal accountability and "blame the system", plus an excuse to get a lot of expansive government powers established that otherwise there would be resistance to.
Scale it up to make a 1st world version, and you'll really have something...
OLPC has, from the outset, said they plan on investigating a commercial product for the developed world, though it is a lower priority than getting their main operation off the ground.
Instead of largely useless $300 notebooks, just start taking $100 donations, don't limit it to people who want to buy one.
OLPC is neither selling $300 notebooks nor taking $100 donations. OLPC will take donations of work on their software and content, though.
The PledgeBank deal was completely independent of OLPC and was rejected by OLPC (which is one reason why it failed: people paying attention knew OLPC said they wouldn't sell the computers no matter how many pledges were made.)
there is no intention to commercially sell these in the US or other countries, so maybe that group of people struck a deal to offer a sale to the general public if they were going to pay for the production of 300,000 of them.
In fact, no deal was ever struck: it was an independent effort that hoped to change OLPCs mind on the sales policy. IIRC, OLPC said they wouldn't even consider it no matter how many people signed up, they were sticking with their plans to sell only to governments and to consider a different, commercial version of the program.
This product is a non-starter, because its target audience doesn't need or really want it.
And yet, five countries have already committed to at least 1 million unit orders per country, at a price (each) upwards of US$200 million (the initial price is higher than the target price).
That's a fair amount of money to drop on something you don't really want.
I have worked in many K12 and colleges as a technology consultant and I agree with the parent. Computers often hinder education. Why? Because computers are not as reliable as a book.
How much time in that experience were you working in rural areas not connected to cities by reliable roads, but which had (as the OLPC project is set to offer) satellite downlink stations and ubiquitous computers?
Because it seems to me that computer might be more reliable as a distribution mechanism for educational materials than books and other conventional consumable supplies that they might replace in that context.
For example, students spend more time on PowerPoint transitions instead of researching good content and preparing a good speech.
That's easily addressed by letting them use computers to research and prepare a presentation, but not in the presentation. Any resource can be misused, of course, and generally the wider the legitimate use, the more ways in which it could be misused. That's hardly a surprise.
I'd rather see them receive one $1000 laptop than ten $100 ones that aren't similar to what the rest of the world use.
Well, it seems that given the choice, for several nations they'd rather receive the OLPC machines than far fewer conventional laptops (or, more likely, buy both the OLPC and far far fewer conventional laptops), since they are buying the OLPC machines.
But, of course, you know what they need better than they do.
And some people say OLPC supporters are "arrogant"?
The problem isn't just poor advertising, it's also wishful thinking.The idea that a bunch of third-world countries were going to leap at the opportunity to provide their citizens with computers was deluded.
Well, "third-world" was never the exclusive focus, and Argentina, Brazil, Thailand, Libya, and Nigeria are already lined up to buy at leat 1 million each.
Sure, the corrupt leaders of these countries will be happy to SAY they want to give all their citizens computers. But when the time comes to actually pony up some money out of their palace-and-mercedes budgets, these leaders will baulk.
The word is "balk", and while the attitude is wonderfully cynical, there doesn't seem to be much backing it up. But, as shipments start in not too many months, pretty soon we'll know.
And, as for charitable givers from the U.S. and other countries, well they're a little more concerned with more pressing issues.
Which is mostly irrelevant to OLPC, which doesn't seem to be soliciting cash donations from idnividual donors.
Right now these countries don't need laptops--they need clean water, food, security, and AIDS medicine.
Actually, a number of the countries OLPC is targetting are net food exporters, so that's often not really an issue.
Laptops aren't near the top of anyone's agenda.
Well, except for the governments that are committing to purchases on the order of US$250 million per country.
Sure, it may not be the focus of charitable givers who are largely ignorant of the real conditions in the countries and whose priorities are set by the pathos of TV commercials and stereotypes about the rest of the world outside the US and Western Europe being nothing but one giant famine, but it certainly is high on someone's agenda.
Mark my words, this will be used as an excuse not to sell them to the public instead of as guidance informing them that their plan was flawed but not invalid.
Um, their (OLPCs) plan was always not to sell them to the public (though perhaps to sell a different, commercial version to the public, though that's not as important as the core mission.) The pledge effort was a third-party effort to get OLPC to change their policy.
Our country (the USA) has gone from sustinance living to superpower in the last 500 years. Why have parts of the rest of the world stagnated so?
Perhaps because in a highly globalized economy (which the USA didn't face in its initial race to near the top, economically) its very hard to get out of a disadvantaged position when you have little of value to sell in the market beyond raw materials and agricultural products (except when you have a unique, critical raw material that you are the sole source or part of a powerful cartel of suppliers.)
$300 in charitable donations probably won't net you $1 less you owe unless you are in a very low income bracket. You need to be over a certain amount or percentage of what you make to even qualify for any reduction in taxes.
Charitable donations that are tax deductible, as the name suggests, are deducted from your taxable income. If you have at least $(1/marginal tax rate) in donations, you will see a reduction in your taxes owed. The higher your income, the higher your marginal tax rate, and therefore the less you have to give to get any given reduction in tax liability. If you are in a lower income tax bracket, you have a lower marginal tax rate, and therefore must give more to get the same tax reduction.
It was a limited time thing because the whole deal was someone's effort to gather support to have something to present to the actual OLPC project (which was unconnected with the pledge deal), to try to convince them to change their policy (which is that the machine will only be sold to national ministries of education, though a commercial version for individual sale is planned to be looked at separately.)
There was, in fact, no guarantee (or even strong reason to believe) that OLPC would have ever agreed to the deal at 100,000: they are seeking orders of at least 1 million units, in the first place, and have a policy on who they will sell too. Even assuming the machines only cost $100 and the rest is profit, 100,000 wouldn't make a big dent: it would subsidize 200,000 machines, or 1/5 of the minimum order.
The reason Africa is in generally poor shape is not because resources don't exist, but because of horribly corrupt governments and warfare. The goal here is education and the spread of information at a more grassroots level, though I have my doubts as well.
I'm not sure why "Africa" is the focus of so much discussion, only two of the five currently committed OLPC countries are in Africa, to start with.
Please explain exactly how cheap laptops will do any good to any of the nations you listed.
For one fairly concrete advantage, OLPC (combined with the satellite time and ground stations that SES Global is donating and developing, respectively) will simplify the distribution of educational materials, particularly to remote locations often not served by good roads.
Unfortunately it isnt really a skill with quite a bit of value in it. The pieces of paper you show when you go for the job are much more valuable.
No, the pieces of paper (certifications, I assume you mean) are effort-saving devices for hiring companies in advanced countries to determine whether you really have the skill.
No doubt, if (say) Nigeria gets as crowded with superficially competent programmers as the US, similar certifications will become important there, too.
And either way there are already a hell of a lot of people with some semblance of programming skills they will never have a job using
Yeah, in the developed world, even someone with computer skills can get lots of other jobs that pay pretty well, and maybe even jobs outside of the main skill area that pay better.
Not very relevant to the prospects for OLPC.
turning every little african child into a computer whizz is not going to get many of them far, they need users to support.
Yeah, so? Most of them won't turn into professional programmers. Having the computers available will help lots of aspects of the local economy the way microcredit has, as an enabling factor. And some small fraction of that activity will end up supporting local developers and IT folks.
I don't know it just seems like someone has said, "grassroots action isnt working for some reason, lets try doing things from the top down instead, maybe that will work somehow"
I suppose it seems like that because you haven't paid any attention. The "grassroots" ($300 pledge) effort never had any official connection to the OLPC project, it was an outside attempt to influence the project. The OLPC project has always been about developing the system and selling it (not giving it, not having people in the developed world buy it to subsidize free distribution) to national ministries of education. Which is what it is still about.
And several countries have already lined up to buy the machines.
I think that you put too much faith in the power of technology.
Since I don't have any "faith" in "the power of technology", I think you are wrong.
Without the proper infrastructure these computers are about as good as a wrist watch.
Sure. So what? The governments buying them know that, and will make decisions based on that. Its not like the West is dumping computers on developing countries willy-nilly. Its simply an option made available to them. And, really, the infrastructure needed to get some value out of them (beyond as a "wrist watch") is pretty minimal.
Are we not only going to give them these computers but also give them the education required to use them effectivly?
Unless you are personally involved in OLPC, "we" is in inappropriate word. As is, in any case, "give". OLPC is selling computer to national ministries of education. Educating people on their use is the responsibility, largely, of those ministries.
Perhaps I'm naive, I'm not up to date on the current state of magical technology so I may be missing a key component here.
The key component you seem to be missing is the part of your brain that enables you to read information, rather than invent your own preconceived and inaccurate notions of things to argue against.
I think that there is technology availble that is far more valuable/inexpensive/accessable.
Apparently, the countries that are buying the OLPC computers disagree with you. But I'm sure you know what is better for educational systems in those countries than their own ministries of education.
And maybe I'm a ludite, I just cannot be convinced that technology can solve many of the target contries problems.
And I'm sure that in addition to your expertise on local education needs, you are also much better informed on the economic and other needs of the involved countries than the local governments who are making the decisions to spend money on the OLPC system.
Many of their citizens would probably be content with remaining farm communities, maybe all they need is fair trade...
"Fair trade" won't make the produce of primitive farming with often very inefficient techniques particularly valuable. OTOH, better education and access to information can provide the means of improving quality of life by improving economic performance, even if the communities remain farming communities.
perhaps a computer could give them access to information on the best markets for their crops, but the last time I checked the internet wasn't everywhere.
OLPC has already recieved pledges of free satellite access from SES Global, which will also be developing a downlink station for rural villages to support OLPC, so yes, the internet isn't everywhere, but part of OLPC is changing that.
To be fair, this OLPC thing is noble but I don't think it will help anytime soon.
Well, its nice that you have an opinion. Might be better if it was something of an informed opinion, but I suppose that's a bit much to ask.
The money could be spent better is all I'm suggesting, like say in teachers and schools, and there is much evidence that proper nutrition is as important to childhood development and their ability to learn as anything else.
The national governments involved are already spending money on teachers and schools and nutrition; presumably they see their OLPC investment as a way to make those other investments more effective.
Any reason why we should think that your opinion is more accurate than theirs?
The truth is that these clowns should realize that they should sell the laptops to the under priviledged here in the United States first. We have plenty of people who need them, entire school systems for example. Prove the concept here and then ship abroad. Why do people always try to run before they can walk?
If the US government wants to place an order, it can.
Its not OLPC's fault if Libya is more committed to providing computers for its school children than the US is.
Slashdot Mirror
The education ministries of the countries receiving the laptops make an affirmative decision on buying them, no one is forcing them on them. I don't think those people count as random first-worlders. Random first-worlders were willing to pledge for a few thousand, with a total price in the hundreds of thousands of US $, the education ministries of developing countries have already committed to buying over 5 million with a total cost near US$1 billion.
Looks to me like the real interest in this project is from the countries that would be getting the computers, not random first-worlders.
But thanks for your opinion on people in developing nations need. I'm sure your opinion is somehow better than that of a "random first-worlder".
Um, no. Some people believe, after studying the situation, that this would help developing countries, so they set up a project where developing countries are able to buy inexpensive laptops. No one is forcing these on developing countries against those nation's will. It's the education ministries of the countries involved that make the decision.
Yeah, well, good for you. You are welcome to start a project to provide any of those dozens of things, and to try to convince people to donate to and work on your project, and to try to convince developing nations that what you are providing is something they need.
Remember, OLPC rejected this idea out of hand, it was an independent third-party effort. The total volume (300,000 units) it would have represented with 100,000 pledges would have been lower than the minimum order they are taking from national governments (which is 1 million units), and the $100 target price (which is lower than what the first governments are paying) is based on dealing with that scale of orders with national governments.
OLPC isn't even seeking cash donations from individual donors, as far as I can tell.
They aren't asking for any kind of donations except work on their content and software, really.
Actually, considerably more; Libya's total commitment is something like $250 million, from published sources (early adopters are, as it always goes, paying a bit of a premium).
A charity drive, it must be remembered, rejected by the actual OLPC project, which is only selling to national governments, and then in lots not less than 1 million units.
(OTOH, Libya's apparently also discussed buying them for poorer countries, as well, which is the kind of charity OLPC will work with.)
Zero.
The OLPC project is still going strong.
Some silly independent effort to get people to pledge to buy something OLPC had clearly stated that they would never sell direct to the public failed.
I would have thought that the Jerome B. Wiesner Professor of Media Technology at MIT counted, by definition, as an educator.
First world countries have well-established textbook industries and effective distribution infrastructure for books, etc. Electronic distribution enables a developing country to get information out in ways that circumvent the often poor physical infrastructure (SES Global's pledge of free satellite access for OLPC plus development of downlink stations designed for rural village is a big factor, here, for OLPC.) n
Developing countries don't face identical challenges to developed countries, so the best course for them often isn't the same as the best course in developed countries.
I don't know what you mean by "warmth", but accepting the reality that the developing world does not have the same current needs as the developed world does now, nor the same needs that the developing world had in the past, but rather a set of needs that in part overlap each of those and in part are completely distinct is, well, just that: accepting reality.
Not accepting reality isn't going to help developing countries develop better.
No, actually, that's exactly backwards. Trying to force the developed world to use solutions adapted to the present state of the developed world, or trying to force it into the path the presently developed world took in the past, won't work to bring them to where we will be at. OTOH, finding solutions that address their current situation is the only way to help them to develop out of that situation.
Its not a "lesser" need, its just different. And its different because their conditions are different, and they aren't going to get from a different starting point than we're at to a similar goal to where we're going by following the same route. They need a different route that addresses where they are starting. OLPC and related things (like the SES Global satellite downlink for rural villages that is being developed to accompany OLPC) are ways of getting forward from where they are now.
Your "the way forward is to pretend the developing world is just like the West with the same current needs" approach is more imperialist than recognizign reality is.
If by "different intelligence agencies" you mean, for instance, the FBI and the FBI (no, that's not a typo), you are correct.
9/11 happened, despite things that should have been caught by the government, because existing intelligence and law enforcement agencies didn't effectively use the information and legal authority they had. Blaming it on poor coordination is largely a way to avoid any personal accountability and "blame the system", plus an excuse to get a lot of expansive government powers established that otherwise there would be resistance to.
In fact, no deal was ever struck: it was an independent effort that hoped to change OLPCs mind on the sales policy. IIRC, OLPC said they wouldn't even consider it no matter how many people signed up, they were sticking with their plans to sell only to governments and to consider a different, commercial version of the program.
And yet, five countries have already committed to at least 1 million unit orders per country, at a price (each) upwards of US$200 million (the initial price is higher than the target price).
That's a fair amount of money to drop on something you don't really want.
How much time in that experience were you working in rural areas not connected to cities by reliable roads, but which had (as the OLPC project is set to offer) satellite downlink stations and ubiquitous computers?
Because it seems to me that computer might be more reliable as a distribution mechanism for educational materials than books and other conventional consumable supplies that they might replace in that context.
That's easily addressed by letting them use computers to research and prepare a presentation, but not in the presentation. Any resource can be misused, of course, and generally the wider the legitimate use, the more ways in which it could be misused. That's hardly a surprise.
Well, it seems that given the choice, for several nations they'd rather receive the OLPC machines than far fewer conventional laptops (or, more likely, buy both the OLPC and far far fewer conventional laptops), since they are buying the OLPC machines.
But, of course, you know what they need better than they do.
And some people say OLPC supporters are "arrogant"?
Well, "third-world" was never the exclusive focus, and Argentina, Brazil, Thailand, Libya, and Nigeria are already lined up to buy at leat 1 million each.
The word is "balk", and while the attitude is wonderfully cynical, there doesn't seem to be much backing it up. But, as shipments start in not too many months, pretty soon we'll know.
Which is mostly irrelevant to OLPC, which doesn't seem to be soliciting cash donations from idnividual donors.
Actually, a number of the countries OLPC is targetting are net food exporters, so that's often not really an issue.
Well, except for the governments that are committing to purchases on the order of US$250 million per country.
Sure, it may not be the focus of charitable givers who are largely ignorant of the real conditions in the countries and whose priorities are set by the pathos of TV commercials and stereotypes about the rest of the world outside the US and Western Europe being nothing but one giant famine, but it certainly is high on someone's agenda.
Um, their (OLPCs) plan was always not to sell them to the public (though perhaps to sell a different, commercial version to the public, though that's not as important as the core mission.) The pledge effort was a third-party effort to get OLPC to change their policy.
Perhaps because in a highly globalized economy (which the USA didn't face in its initial race to near the top, economically) its very hard to get out of a disadvantaged position when you have little of value to sell in the market beyond raw materials and agricultural products (except when you have a unique, critical raw material that you are the sole source or part of a powerful cartel of suppliers.)
Charitable donations that are tax deductible, as the name suggests, are deducted from your taxable income. If you have at least $(1/marginal tax rate) in donations, you will see a reduction in your taxes owed. The higher your income, the higher your marginal tax rate, and therefore the less you have to give to get any given reduction in tax liability. If you are in a lower income tax bracket, you have a lower marginal tax rate, and therefore must give more to get the same tax reduction.
OLPC was never asking for your money, and they'd probably rather you gave your $200 to the Red Cross.
Now, if you wanted to devote some time working on their code or content, they'd be more than glad to accept that...
It was a limited time thing because the whole deal was someone's effort to gather support to have something to present to the actual OLPC project (which was unconnected with the pledge deal), to try to convince them to change their policy (which is that the machine will only be sold to national ministries of education, though a commercial version for individual sale is planned to be looked at separately.)
There was, in fact, no guarantee (or even strong reason to believe) that OLPC would have ever agreed to the deal at 100,000: they are seeking orders of at least 1 million units, in the first place, and have a policy on who they will sell too. Even assuming the machines only cost $100 and the rest is profit, 100,000 wouldn't make a big dent: it would subsidize 200,000 machines, or 1/5 of the minimum order.
I'm not sure why "Africa" is the focus of so much discussion, only two of the five currently committed OLPC countries are in Africa, to start with.
For one fairly concrete advantage, OLPC (combined with the satellite time and ground stations that SES Global is donating and developing, respectively) will simplify the distribution of educational materials, particularly to remote locations often not served by good roads.
No, the pieces of paper (certifications, I assume you mean) are effort-saving devices for hiring companies in advanced countries to determine whether you really have the skill.
No doubt, if (say) Nigeria gets as crowded with superficially competent programmers as the US, similar certifications will become important there, too.
Yeah, in the developed world, even someone with computer skills can get lots of other jobs that pay pretty well, and maybe even jobs outside of the main skill area that pay better.
Not very relevant to the prospects for OLPC.
Yeah, so? Most of them won't turn into professional programmers. Having the computers available will help lots of aspects of the local economy the way microcredit has, as an enabling factor. And some small fraction of that activity will end up supporting local developers and IT folks.
I suppose it seems like that because you haven't paid any attention. The "grassroots" ($300 pledge) effort never had any official connection to the OLPC project, it was an outside attempt to influence the project. The OLPC project has always been about developing the system and selling it (not giving it, not having people in the developed world buy it to subsidize free distribution) to national ministries of education. Which is what it is still about.
And several countries have already lined up to buy the machines.
Since I don't have any "faith" in "the power of technology", I think you are wrong.
Sure. So what? The governments buying them know that, and will make decisions based on that. Its not like the West is dumping computers on developing countries willy-nilly. Its simply an option made available to them. And, really, the infrastructure needed to get some value out of them (beyond as a "wrist watch") is pretty minimal.
Unless you are personally involved in OLPC, "we" is in inappropriate word. As is, in any case, "give". OLPC is selling computer to national ministries of education. Educating people on their use is the responsibility, largely, of those ministries.
The key component you seem to be missing is the part of your brain that enables you to read information, rather than invent your own preconceived and inaccurate notions of things to argue against.
Apparently, the countries that are buying the OLPC computers disagree with you. But I'm sure you know what is better for educational systems in those countries than their own ministries of education.
And I'm sure that in addition to your expertise on local education needs, you are also much better informed on the economic and other needs of the involved countries than the local governments who are making the decisions to spend money on the OLPC system.
"Fair trade" won't make the produce of primitive farming with often very inefficient techniques particularly valuable. OTOH, better education and access to information can provide the means of improving quality of life by improving economic performance, even if the communities remain farming communities.
OLPC has already recieved pledges of free satellite access from SES Global, which will also be developing a downlink station for rural villages to support OLPC, so yes, the internet isn't everywhere, but part of OLPC is changing that.
Well, its nice that you have an opinion. Might be better if it was something of an informed opinion, but I suppose that's a bit much to ask.
The national governments involved are already spending money on teachers and schools and nutrition; presumably they see their OLPC investment as a way to make those other investments more effective.
Any reason why we should think that your opinion is more accurate than theirs?
If the US government wants to place an order, it can.
Its not OLPC's fault if Libya is more committed to providing computers for its school children than the US is.