For $150, Third-World Laptop Stirs a Big Debate

[Rick Tomaschuk]

On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 00:45 -0500, Christopher Browne wrote:

> When shipped in *that* form, they require no "tender loving care;"
> they need only throw them at a bin, because nobody cares if the
> computers survive the trip intact.

I don't agree. I've been in and around shipping for decades. You don't
know what you're talking about.

> It shouldn't take pointing out that expecting a shipment of computers
> to survive a trip overseas will require considerable packing effort
> and cost.  Common sense should make that obvious.
> 

> But the point is that McDonalds has been viable in such countries, as
> have been various other sorts of franchises, demonstrating their
> economic importance and power.
> 

McD's is a short term benefit and a long term liability...like Walmart.
Those companies grow on the goodwill of people and government, create
huge profits for their owners while destroying small business.

> Evidently you haven't examined the specifications of the OLPC.  It's
> only a "better" machine based on metrics that assume local
> infrastructure involves regular power losses.
> 
I'm old enough to have learned to read using books. What wrong with
books? They can be read using a candle.

> > > The OLPC draws less than five watts per hour, a small fraction of what a
> > > conventional laptop requires (let alone a big PC and screen). It can
> > > thus be self-powered (the hand crank and foot pedal were rejected in
> > > favour of something resembling a salad spinner). Its power and network
> > > systems were designed for areas without much existing electrical or
> > > communucations infrastructure. And it can probably tolerate drops and
> > > spills better than your average laptop.
> > >
> > > - Evan
> > >
> > As I said earlier charity is a noble undertaking but we need to look
> > after our countries needs. Charity begins at home.
> 
> Nonsense.  Charity begins with those that have the wherewithal to be charitable.
> 
> Starving Africans aren't in any position to "begin" charitable programs.

Now we're getting somewhere. Why aren't they in any position to begin
charitable programs? The reason is western business people intrude on
their lives and impose western lifestyle on their well established
tribal lifestyles which have been passed down through the generations.
Westerners essentially create the problem then sell them the solution.

> In any case, why should you care what people at some foreign

What do care? I have an opinion just as you do...

> charitable foundation might choose to do?  The organizations behind
> the OLPC program are throwing *American* money at the matter; if
> "charity begins at home," well, that's not "home."
-- 
"Replacing desktops one PC at a time"
http://www.TorontoNUI.ca

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists