The Article is representative of many 'feel good' articles related to the XO that have come out over recent months. There is no doubt at this time, I think, that the MIT project has, probably inadvertently, had a profoundly positive effect on the computer industry. The laudable, if impossible goals originally set by the OLPC team (once $100 laptop team) forced every single serious player in the market place to offer an entry level computer offering that will allow a whole new group of people to enter into the computer marketplace. It will take a significant and currently unseen commitment from government to bring us the other half of the equation (connectivity) which will fully emancipate the rest of that portion of the market place. The innovations in power consumption and the popularization of mesh networking and rebranding of the linux desktop also have the possibility of offering serious positive dividends down the road.
<br><br>The actual results of project depend on what article you are reading. <a href="http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL19821905.html">http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL19821905.html</a> This article, about surfing porn with the XO has not necessarily included itself in advertorials like the one written a few months back in the NYT.
<a href="http://davecormier.com/edblog/2007/10/05/olpc-one-laptop-per-child-advert-ical-in-the-ny-times/">http://davecormier.com/edblog/2007/10/05/olpc-one-laptop-per-child-advert-ical-in-the-ny-times/</a>. The current article in question from the Chicago Tribune is very interesting not so much in what it speaks of 'child' enthusiasm but what they don't speak of 'student' enthusiasm. The results they are talking about are very exciting and definitely transformative. But how exactly is it transformative? How exactly will the education system be able to adopt itself to the new changes? What will a 2 1/2 day training course be able to do to train someone in one/one laptop usage? Who will prevent older siblings, other people or even military organizations from using the video recording or valuable mesh networking systems for uses other than education?
<br><br>Whatever plans may have been secretly cooking up at the Media labs in terms of a comprehensive idea of what it will 'mean' to give laptops to kids in developing countries, we have yet to see more from Bender/Negroponte than 'That's exactly what we intended' and 'the kids will know what to do'. The funny thing about that is that if this plan was being rolled out in a first world nation I would be cheering it along apace. The market forces involved in putting $200 laptops in a village where pencils are hard to come by concerns me however.
<br><br><br>These laptops will probably<br> 1. subvert power structures within classrooms by making kids the experts<br> 2. ditto for families<br> 3. be a valuable commodity<br> 4. allow kids to learn how to do basic computer repair
<br> 5. allow kids to learn really cool computer things<br> 6. support linux desktop development<br> 7. allow kids to learn how to use video (this is very good and potentially not so good)<br><br>These would be goals I would very strongly support in my own culture and the educational projects that I am currently involved in (see
<a href="http://livingarchives.ca">http://livingarchives.ca</a>, <a href="http://youthvoices.net">http://youthvoices.net</a>). I worry about their possible impact in unfunded schools and in highly hierarchic cultures... <br>
<br>Oh... and again. 2 1/2 days of training is ridiculous. This program will drive these teachers to distraction, and will waste essential funding on more windmill tilting.<br>