Linked by David Adams on Tue 4th Dec 2007 19:27 UTC, submitted by MissinBeOS
From the WSJ: "The dream of cheap computers in the hands of millions of poor children is becoming a reality, though not exactly as its proponents imagined. For-profit competitors snatched the idea and have run with it."
Thread beginning with comment 288657
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: It never fails to amaze me...
by tomcat on Fri 7th Dec 2007 00:15
in reply to "RE[4]: It never fails to amaze me..."
Member since:2006-01-06
Apart from in urban areas, most of the worlds poor live in isolated villages, and small communities, far too small to afford [or their government to afford] a 'regional computing cafe', therefore these 'regional' centers will have to be placed: regionally. In low population density areas this will mean that the centers will be widely spaced. I admit that the 100 miles figure is not based on research, but is not a totally inaccurate figure. The point is that many third world communities are far more isolated than 1st world people imagine. Westerners, i.e., rich 1st world people can afford a far higher computer/population density than we are talking about with regional computing cafes. Also, computers are used to supplement a first-rate education that means that most people, when sitting down at a computer have decent literacy/numeracy. This baseline knowledge allows them to understand the semantics of what they are faced with much more easily.
You completely ignored my point about schools. If kids are attending schools -- schools which are apparently close enough to actually attend -- then these machines can be placed in those schools. It makes centralized administration and support easier, it prevents resale of hardware, and it still ensures that kids get access to computing resources.
RE[6]: It never fails to amaze me...
by stestagg on Fri 7th Dec 2007 01:53
in reply to "RE[5]: It never fails to amaze me..."
Member since:2006-06-03
I think that you think that all schools are like those in 'The OC'. the sorts of schools that the OLPC people are visiting have: No security, usually not any power, or reliable power, and maybe service <100 kids.
This means that they do not qualify it for any kind of regional internet cafe unless you are talking about computers of roughly the price of the OLPC scheme.
The lack of physical security in these places makes it MUCH safer to keep the laptops with the kids. What would you rather do? steal one computer from your son/daughter, or break into a school that you have no emotional ties to and run away with 10 computers, or 30?
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-06-03
So I used some artistic license, here are excerpts from what you actually said:
Working? Farming? Military? Hanging out, smoking weed?
Rates of major infectious diseases are "very high".
regional conflict, forced conscription of children, HIV/AIDS, poor/nonexistent sewage, lack of clean drinking water, etc.
Apart from in urban areas, most of the worlds poor live in isolated villages, and small communities, far too small to afford [or their government to afford] a 'regional computing cafe', therefore these 'regional' centers will have to be placed: regionally. In low population density areas this will mean that the centers will be widely spaced. I admit that the 100 miles figure is not based on research, but is not a totally inaccurate figure. The point is that many third world communities are far more isolated than 1st world people imagine.
Westerners, i.e., rich 1st world people can afford a far higher computer/population density than we are talking about with regional computing cafes. Also, computers are used to supplement a first-rate education that means that most people, when sitting down at a computer have decent literacy/numeracy. This baseline knowledge allows them to understand the semantics of what they are faced with much more easily.