The case against OLPC?

Jamon Camisso jamon.camisso-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org
Fri Dec 7 16:35:04 UTC 2007


On December 7, 2007 11:05:37 am Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> I usually think John Dvorak is a headline-grabbing crank, but this
> latest column rang true with sentiments that simply won't leave my
> head.
>
> Isn't the whole idea of "let's give the developing world little
> computers" a kind of rich-person's feel-good thinking, when so much
> of the world doesn't even have enough to eat?
>
> Is the OLPC going to fix literacy rates without teachers or books?
>
> IMO Dvorak goes too far in calling the OLPC little more than an
> ad-delivery device, and the project's very existence is driving a
> whole new genre of small, cheap and mostly Linux-based computers. But
> his core point -- about the OLPC being a kind of cultural
> imperialism, offering computers to societies that need food, books,
> clean water, jobs and safety -- is hard to shake.
>
> Perhaps the OLPC isn't really designed for the poorest countries, and
> should be concentrated in places -- such as Brazil and Malaysia --
> where basic needs are (generally) met and computer literacy is a
> _next_ step. But that's not how the program is being promoted.
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2227850,00.asp
>
> What do you think?

I think that any technology designed to address social and economic 
problems will *usually* fail, since technology is only a tool to some 
particular end, not an end in and of itself.

I too agree to some extent that we're embedding our ideology into the 
systems. But to call that an imposition is a little far fetched. 
Consider that all the countries signed on to the project are purchasing 
the units (for whatever the cost), and are  not the world's poorest: 
http://www.olpcnews.com/countries/

Moreover, those countries will hopefully not just hand the things out. 
Rather, I think most have some sort of plan to integrate the units with 
existing educational strategies. So I hardly call that imperialism.

Perhaps mcfletch can give a better explanation than my cursory one here 
as I'm not that well informed.

Jamon
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20071207/8a456510/attachment.sig>


More information about the Legacy mailing list