Mike: In this form it might not be incredibly useful. The thought is in the right place, but the focus is slightly off and underestimating the way people will use them. Right now its more a toy and I think durability is an issue. It could be a great idea, but I too am a bit skeptical how it will relate in actual practice once in the hands of real people. It might not be what people will really need in the long run.
Greg: Like if they will be actually useful? Or the fact that they would be used by people who otherwise have no contact with similar modern technology?
Mike: Exactly. In some ways, what is the point? Glorified textbooks? I see the logic in giving people access to infinite books instead of just one. But that is from a economic cost-friendly view.
Greg: But they have wireless internet right? So supposedly you wouldnt need to store anything on a local machine.
Mike: Is this just a stopgap?
Aryn: I like the idea. Its a good way to get people information that would not readily have access or be able to afford a computer for educational purposes.
Mike: But isnt there some sort of ethical question here? Just playing devil’s advocate.
Aryn: Like providing computers when food and governmental stability are more crucial to their survival?
Mike: One issue yes.
Greg: Good questions. To me there are two criticisms- an ethical, and an engineering. Like you said- are they lasting and durable? So that’s a question of how well they are engineered. But then there’s also a question of if it’s just a glorified textbook. If it’s really useful. Is this an acceptable substitute for traditional pencil/paper education? Suppose you suddenly introduced these to a traditionally poor/illiterate population- what are the ramifications of that? Those I think are the ethical questions- which to me are the bigger questions.
Aryn: It may or may not be what the people need. I am not sure that is for us to decide.. But from a development stand¬point it would be good to have the option for people to use/learn from, in our ever increasing world reliance on computers. Bill Gates scoffs at the idea of a $100 computer, but I like it…
Mike: I definitely think the ethical questions outweigh the engineering ones.
Greg: What happens when you suddenly insert modern technology to a population that isn’t ready for it? I think you could also argue that it would be unethical not to introduce modern technology.
Mike: Its like technological evangelicalism in a way.
Greg: That’s true… candy to join free world.
Mike: It civilizes them to be able to meet the demands of the westernized world. But does it perhaps de-emphasize their own natural progression, by simply jump start them to new education…And who is to dictate what they will be taught. I am not conspiracy prone…its unlikely there is this clandestine plot to teach them our morals or that any of what I say is going to happen but these are certain things we should question a bit…whom does it truly benefit?
Greg:Is the point just to bring more tech-saavy people into a free trade, world market economy? Surely there’s plenty of historic¬al examples of similar situations.
Mike: Where is Jared Diamond when you need his expertise?
Greg: Yes. Maybe he has a Gmail account. He’d be fun to chat with everyday at work.
Mike: I know. I want to read Collapse.
Greg: Does he have a new book out?
Mike: Somewhat a sequal to Guns Germs and Steel where it talks not about how societies and cultures were built, but how they are destroyed.
Greg: Looks really good. I never made it through Guns Germs and Steel, so I had to get the bullet points from my Dad and PBS, but if I remember right he has a really interesting discussion on the domestication of animals. Those communities that had access to domesticatable animals gave rise to the greatest civilizations. Something to that effect.
Mike: Yeah…I never finished it either…its pretty dense. It’s true though…those with time to domesticate agriculture and animals had time to develop civilizations and cultures within due to the long term benefits of agriculture. I never saw the documentary. I feel it would have simplified it just enough to make the book a bit more digestible.
So back on topic then, IS the point to educate or to ‘save’ them?
Greg: Well… let me ask you this- is there a difference between the two? If the point is to save, is that bad? Why? I think it is, but cant pinpoint why I feel that way, besides the fact that it’s egotistical on the part of the western world.
Mike:I think thats why it has a weird feeling to me…it just comes across as this ‘cure’ somehow. I’m not against these computers at all…It just feels funny like you said… it’s intangible. However education is the only way to bring people to a new potentials and help them but…
Greg: But couldn’t this technology be put to use in America? Poor areas that cant afford computers? Although it would be depressing to see handcranked computers in our own country.
Mike: I know… I oft think we neglect our own social problems while liberating everyone else. But our ignorance of the lower class is due to how it conflicts with our sense of the American Dream.
Greg: Right. Here’s another question: Suppose you have some poor village in India- one of the target communities for this laptop project. Would people raise eithical concerns if instead of donating laptops, textbooks and other traditional learning materials were donated? If the laptops were loaded with the same exact textbooks (and potentially more b/c the associated costs of puting a .pdf textbook on a server would be likely less than printing), what is the difference with the laptops? If education is the key, that is?
Mike: I agree… I think that is their point. From a cost perspective its SO much better to give them everything in a tidy package and our dollar goes a lot farther to help. I wonder how much computers have helped educate people in our own country as a potential for higher education and knowledge for those who cannot afford them? Next to none, right? So if this is a sincere method of creating cost effective exposure to technology, information and outlets for these people (domestic or foreign developing countries) then I see this as a great means of a healthy first step.
But what kind of access are they really getting? Who decides? Do they want it? Does this commidify education? Will this create more strife as people will steal these machines the way they steal food from the underprivaledged? Am I sounding too negative and paranoid?
Greg: Nooo not at all.
Mike: I don’t think there would be a controversy if it were only books and not computers handed out…I’m not sure what makes this different.
Greg: I think this is why conservatives are generally against programs like this- social engineering programs always have unanticipated consequences. It’s strange- there’s no difference at all, yet it makes all the difference in the world, I think. And like you said, I can’t pinpoint why… but your questions about who decides and if they really want it, are important.
But another point I would make is that the textbook industry in our country is scary in and of itself- in some senses what Texas demands of textbooks is what the country gets b/c it’s a giant market. This is a different discussion, but my point is that the laptop concept has potential to actually free people from big brother so to speak. More open source information.
Mike: I want this to be a great gesture to really make a difference. But then, we wont know for years to come.
Greg: Exactly.
Mike: History and information will always be a bit tinted by perspective…and individual interpretation. The text books emphasis on particular events is what is being taught across the States, but that I think is one of my points originally. I just hope this doesnt turn out to be another way to re-write history again in our favour.
It all goes in waves. Originally, the internet in general had all this potential to be open sourced, but then it became commidfied and in turn, unreliable. But another wave has resurged to allow for people who want to re-empower the internet to be a useful and connected place where there is a greater good to be served by contributing proper info. Perhaps these computers have the same potential.
Greg: I think it depends on the subject too. Math and, to a lesser extent, science aren’t nearly as sensitive to interpretation as say history. But how do you think the internet has become commodified and unreliable?
Mike: It’s less so now…but for awhile, yes. There have always been internet communities and usegroups etc, but to find real information, it was much harder to seek out. Now there is an elastic reaction to the other side where people are demanding fact and reliable sources…Hence Wikipedia (wikis in general), blogs and even the Facebook. People are less patient with misinformation. Plus I don’t subscribe to your VOODOO SCIENCE… That’s crazy talk…
Greg: hah. Yeah, science is for the birds. Whoever thought testable hypotheses was a usefull idea anyways?
Mike: Not me. God doesnt use science…he uses his braun.
So what do you think? Email us at [email protected]
Coming up NEXT WEEK: We take a look at Urban Redevelopment!