From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 13 00:57:39 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1424C16A418 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:57:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B8C13C4B0 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:57:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: (qmail 566 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2007 00:30:50 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 13 Nov 2007 00:30:50 -0000 Message-ID: <4738EFE1.3090901@chuckr.org> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:29:21 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071107 SeaMonkey/1.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Marella References: <20071111195501.46d58539@p4> <200711120704.lAC744lR082341@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <20071112230920.17bac37c@attila> <18232.48642.463639.901784@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20071112113639.14d0f5a2@p4> In-Reply-To: <20071112113639.14d0f5a2@p4> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Olivier Nicole , Robert Huff , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: One Laptop Per Child X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:57:39 -0000 Robert Marella wrote: > On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:56:34 -0500 > Robert Huff wrote: > >> The problem I have always had with this is computer use does >> not exist in a vacuum; it changes, and is changed by, the society in >> which it happens. >> If I look at the countries of the "first world", I see places >> that have walked the path from the written word to the telegraph to >> the telephone to the computer. At each step they've tested the new >> technology, learning what it can and cannot do, discovering stuff >> the inventors never even imagined, discarding ideas that are >> techically problematic or culturally unpalatable, and adapting to it >> as it adapted to them. >> Now consider dropping 100,000 OLPC on a country where the >> (median and mode) hardware layer is paper and ink, the government - >> often autocratic and kleptocratic - cannot manage to install and run >> a 1950's era phone system, and religious leaders fulminate against >> imunization as a "foreign plot". Even under the best of >> circumstaces exactly what do people reasoaly expect to happen? >> >> > In my opinion you underestimate the abilities of people. There is no > need for the people of the third world countries to "evolve" as we did. > One only needs to look at the progress made in China over the last few > decades. People who never had a telephone, facsimile, radio or in some > cases even books are now using cell phones, computers and televisions. > > China is becoming more capitalistic, if not democratic, not because the > government wants it to but because it has to. The people are more > knowledgeable about the rest of the world because of the new ways of > communication. > > If only one percent of the 100,000 laptops in your above example were > to fall into hands of some child who is awakened to a new world then > that is 1,000 children who will grow up and help change that country. > > As someone else stated, "It's my money". I have completed the "give > one, get one" order form. I hope my laptop is sent to a worthy child > but if not so be it. I have not decided what to do with the one that I > receive. My grand daughter is only 3 and I think that is a little to > young. I will probably give the laptop to one of my great nieces. Perfectly correct, but in terms of getting the most results from your dollar, using this way is tantamount to purning your cash. Just because you might get some vanishlingly small return from your money is simply no reson to waste your money like that. No when better options exist.