CrunchGear

Totally.

OLPC is a garbage vanity project being run by a loose cannon hack (Nick Neg). This has nothing to do with the best way to help underserved peoples. This is all about some rich whitey who “had a vision” and laid his ego on the line to see it through. OLPC has done way more to piss off rich businessmen than it has to help poor children.

Wow! I think it’s a great idea. Much better the ugly kindle.
All I want is to put a shitload of reading in different formats (HTML, Flash, PDF), put it in my big pocket and carry with me around the house, out and about.
I love the size and I love the book-like design.

“Kids games are garbage, for the most part, but interactive books and the written word are gold.”

What a poor statement. Some of us owe our imagination to the games we played as kids, back before the days of interactive books (well, we did have choose your own adventure books).

You’re missing the point if you truly believe your statement. It’s not about books or games, its about learning and play.

“I’d much rather spend $5000 to train a teacher in a developing country than spend $500 on a crappy laptop. That’s just me.”

The problem is with that idea is that the teachers then have no resources where the children can act and learn by doing in an environment (with technology) that will help enable them to not only become more educated, but improve career options. Also, $500? I believe the aim of the project is $100, don’t lie to make your point sound valid.

As for other companies coming in to replace the OLPC program, maybe. But it wont be the big names mentioned in the Media like Intel and MS, because they are partners in OLPC.

As for the Freakonomics quote, remember that correlation does not equal causation. It’s not like bringing hundreds of books into a broken home with deadbeat parents would make the children do better in school. More likely, the parents of a kid who does well in school are likely to be smart and cultured so they have read lots of books. Implying that having an OLPC in the house will cause a child to do better in school based on the Freakonomics corrrelation is quite a stretch.

geez, i’m getting a little tired of all of the bashing of this project. I’m not saying that it doesn’t deserve scrutiny, as it certainly does, but the bashing that it gets is over the top. It’s so easy to sit back in our nice houses and super fast T1’s and the latest gadgets and talk about what *should* be done in poor countries…. at least they’re doing ~something~ and they’re not even wasting taxpayer’s money trying (they’re a non-profit but at least they’re delivering a product rather than just begging for donations).

> the single, traceable correlation between a child’s abilities in school and his home life are the number of books a family has in their home.

I’d like to read the article. I searched in vain with so small display computer, EeePC.

I too don’t get the bashing the OLPC seems to enjoy. It’s an interesting, focused project. There are other organisations who focus on training teachers, building wells and bringing second-hand books into schools. OLPC wants to bring laptops to poor children. What’s wrong with that?

I find the whole phrasing of this article a bit confusing. One of your points for ebooks being more effective than laptops is that they can’t be confiscated… Dictatorial governments have been burning books for hundreds of years.

From what I can see this new OLPC is taking on the form-factor of a book vs turning into a Kindle. It’s an obviously versatile design and one can only hope that the thing manages to get produced cheaply but it’s not turning into an ebook. It’s still very much a laptop, just a more practical one.

I don’t get why a change in form-factor generates a discussion about how poor people need ebooks more than laptops. The idea of the OLPC is to get a connected device into as many hands as possible, allowing for communication, expression and learning not only reading. The ability to make the machine do what you want it to is more valuable than simply being an information display.

I think a laptop that has excellent eBook functionaity is spot-on! My personal experience is that a child who reads will do well in school (uh, well, if given the proper incentive…). Anyone who knows me can tell you I’m not cultured at all. I just can’t comprehend the people who think that all the kids in underdeveloped countries need is rice and a cell phone. I got my first IT job through the internet. Guess where I got the knowledge? Here’s an example: when I did my first motherboard upgrade, I printed out several pages from Tom’s Hardware Guide. The trained instructors came after I’d been at my job for a couple of years, and I didn’t learn a whole lot more than I’d already learned on my own using, upgrading and replacing crappy computers! If not for computers and the net, I really don’t know how I would have paid my bills.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that sometimes kids from horrible homes latch onto a dream and do great things needs to go read some books. Yes, those of us who grew up with educated parents who encouraged us generally have an advantage, but it wouldn’t take much to find a dozen or so stories about people with nothing who became the best. How do you help those kids spot a dream? Again, you’d have a better chance with a computer that’s got access to a wealth of free learning materials than with a bowl of rice and a cell phone.

All my own opinion, even if it seems so blatantly obvious to me.

Books are, indeed, great for kids. Learning to read is important; and learning to use the mind’s eye to visualize a story can greatly improve the relative quality of one’s life.

I still contend that laptops to children in developing nations is a valuable exercise. It helps kids learn how to think. It helps them learn how to problem solve in new and novel ways. It helps them participate in their own education, rather than passively accept the pronouncements from the teachers. Just as some kids will be unenthusiastic about reading a text, some kids will be unenthusiastic about a laptop. But the same spark that can be ignited in a kid when she truly identifies with one of the literary greats can also be ignited in a kid when she discovers that she can make the laptop do her bidding. The kid that gets inspired by reading a poem might be driven to learn more about grammar and composition; the kid that gets inspired by writing a program might be driven to learn engineering.

I don’t argue that the OLPC project as it stands is in pretty bad shape, and is a far cry from what I thought it was when I bought into the program. I really liked Negroponte’s statement that it wasn’t a laptop program but an education program. When viewed in that light, then yes, the OLPC laptop is extraordinary and valuable. The constructionist education model might not be perfect, and the OLPC implementation might not be the best it could be, but it’s a good start and paves the way for others to improve on the work done so far.

This isn’t your run-of-the-mill laptop. The mesh networking and shared activities make the OLPC laptop a far more _interactive_ device than I think many people give it credit for. We take for granted IRC, IM and Twitter; but a classroom in Africa has no use for such things. The shared activities on the OLPC are much better geared for the kinds of community interaction likely to occur in off-net locations.

A book — physical or electronic — is a static, immutable thing. The laptop can be modified, changed, tinkered with. This opens up whole new avenues of instructor- and self-led education opportunities.