I want to believe in the $100 laptop…
… but I don’t.
Since seeing it demonstrated at WSIS last year, I’ve tried really hard not to think about it. However I was prompted by a post by Steve Cisler on the incom-l mailing list, a blog post by Jakob P entitled Cheap Stuff from the West, and a discussion on Third World Mobile Computing. I started to get quite irate again, so I’m writing this post to try and disentangle my thoughts from everybody else’s. Bear with me.
The first question is, why am I getting irate? Jakob quotes from an interview with Negroponte which sums up the fundamental problem:
WN: Is the goal literally to make computers available to every child that wants one in the world?
Negroponte: It’s every child in the world whether they want one or not. They may not know they want one.
Bam! That’s it right there. Replace the word “computers” in that sentence with “religion” (choose your own religion) and hopefully you see my point. These children, they don’t know what they want! But Uncle Nick knows what they want - they want a cheap laptop!
The unthinking optimism of technology enthusiasts has been discussed by people far more intelligent than me. I share much of the hope that technology can solve many problems but I also remain realistic about how much technology can achieve. You tend to get that way when you’ve just come back from Darfur, where it’s hard to see what people are going to get out of a cheap laptop when they don’t have clean water, food security or livelihoods. (Unless they’re all going to turn into computer programmers and we can outsource all our work to Kass.)
Or am I denying the poorest people in the world access to a miraculous tool that could change their lives? It’s difficult to criticise projects like the $100 laptop, because they’re presented as inherently positive. Back to Mr Negroponte:
One laptop per child: Children are your most precious resource, and they can do a lot of self-learning and peer-to-peer teaching. Bingo. End of story.
And there’s my second problem. Not only does he know what these children want (in fact, he believes he knows what they need), but he knows how they should use these little miracles. At no point do I have the sense that the children themselves, or their families, are involved in this process: this is a top-down initiative that will be implemented by their governments. Needless to say, the inherent problems of working through governments in many developing countries is not really addressed.
Before I shut up, one more quote:
One does not think of community pencils—kids have their own. They are tools to think with, sufficiently inexpensive to be used for work and play, drawing, writing, and mathematics. A computer can be the same, but far more powerful. Furthermore, there are many reasons it is important for a child to own something—like a football, doll, or book—not the least of which being that these belongings will be well-maintained through love and care.
So two things occur to me here. First, everywhere you go in rural Africa, kids will follow you shouting one of two things: “Give me dollar!” or “Give me pen!” Kids often don’t have their own pencils, so why not start right there? Basic stationary for schools is a far more appealling proposition for me, and probably more appealling for the kids.
Second, “it is important for a child to own something” reflects a very particular view of the world that, for me, shows that he doesn’t really understand the nature of poverty. In a poor family, what’s the impact going to be on the parents if their children “own” an item that is worth more than the most expensive thing their will probably ever own?
Perhaps more obviously, why wouldn’t the parents try to sell on that laptop to pay for other things - like food, shelter materials or medical care? I’m not expecting One Laptop per Child to solve all the development problems facing the world - so maybe what really bothers me is the style of the enterprise, rather than the substance.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
You take OLPC too far. It’s easy to make fun of Negroponte’s comments. Yes, it is self-evident that people without food and water don’t have much benefit for the $100 laptop. They’ll sell it for food and water.
But why trash the idea of producing a computer so cheap that it will be affordable in the poorest of countries, even if it is not the intervention for the poorest of the poor? It may not do much for Darfur, but one laptop per child in Lesotho could revolutionize the ability of youth to participate in a global economy that is currently leaving them behind.
Computers have been a tremendous boon to the rich world, so why criticize an attempt to make them accessible to the poor? Your arguments could have been made about the prospect of introducing mobile phone to Sub-Saharan African 10 years ago - after all, poor people don’t need mobile phones, they need food and water! But look how mobile phones have bypassed the plodding land-based state-owned telecoms, and what a fundamental part of business and life they now play in SSA!
Some of Negroponte’s quotes are a little bit absurd, but don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Paul
3 Apr 06 at 6:44
I realise that Negroponte is just hyping this up to create interest and gather support. I know that mobile phones have revolutionised the lives of many people in developing countries. I believe that access to computing power (and the associated educational opportunities) can potentially help a lot of people.
And yet… I can’t help but feel that this utopian vision (like all utopian visions) doesn’t quite ring true. The hype raises expectations - and as you know, managing expectations in relief or development projects is critical to their success.
Mobile phones have improved many people’s lives, but it isn’t a given that they’ve necessarily helped poor people. I haven’t seen much research into actual impact (as opposed to penetration) except for last year’s report on telecommunications by the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation,
the Econonic Impact of Telecommunications on Rural Livelihoods and Poverty Reduction.
The main findings of that report concluded that telephones “valued more by richer and better educated people than by the poorer, less educated or more marginal members of society.”
Finally, access to computing power relies on a lot more than the availability of cheap hardware. In particular, regulatory frameworks govern a lot of access questions, particularly when it comes to the internet, and those frameworks reflect the attitude of governments - who don’t always have the best interests of their citizens in mind. Yet the $100 laptop will be distributed through deals with those governments.
It’s also worth remembering that the rapid uptake of mobile phones was the not the result of a (semi-)philanthropic venture such as OLPC. It was the combination of a lack of existing infrastructure and rapid uptake under market conditions - and it took the telecommunications industry completely by surprise.
Paul Currion
3 Apr 06 at 19:16
I really want to believe it will work. But I’m unable to - the tint supplier is out of the proper rose color for my glasses.
Here are couple recent articles:
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3596426
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=112805D
~james
James
4 Apr 06 at 22:37
I’m a missionary in India and I’m all for drilling wells and sanitation projects, food and clothing for the needy, taking care of the aged and getting good health care affordable. But, even more than these I’m for disruptive change that stops a culture from continue to destroy itself. I’ve been watching the OLPC project from day one and hope that it gets to market no matter what the motive or forethought. It will empower third world children to have an immutable voice in the world for the first time. That’s something to rejoice about…
Perhaps every child doesn’t really want a laptop. In truth, no child needs a laptop! Children need love and attention and food and shelter and clothing and generous counsel for their future. They don’t even need dollars or community pencils! In the end programs like the OLPC are not really about the child anyway. It’s about social development, governmental planning and the future of the world. Is it a good thing for a government to think about the future wellbeing of it’s citizens?
A country that knows how to program computers will be more likely to find ways to cope with it’s ecological, economic and health issues. When we give kids computers we allow them to transcribe their thinking processes to executable ideas. Is it a good thing for kid’s ideas to become executable?
We know that OLPC is a plot to take over the world with technology and cultures will change just like ours has changed with every new tech product from the bread knife to the Tivo! Is it wrong to purposefully impact a cultural shift? If you answered “yes” then the only thing left to do is sit back and let it go wherever. Otherwise most of us will understand that we have a responsibility and privilege to impact our world in some small way and we must do it for the good of the world.
Suppose parents sell a laptop to procure the kid’s dinner. Is there anything really wrong about that? It may be sad but let’s get real! I’m sure there will be true abuses of the machines. Drunks might liquidate their child’s laptop to feed their addiction. This changes the paradigm of problems like these but it doesn’t really cause them or even make them worse. If you want to solve the problems of child abuse a computer will not help people need to change.
A more grave concern is the easier access to pornography. We’re seeing the affects of internet porn here in India. It is ripping and destroying cultures. But these same computers and technology are employing new people so quickly it has American’s wondering when India is gonna take their job. It’s balanced the world job market considerably at the expense of the west. I expect the same things to happen when you’ve got children doing network programing from age five in Africa, Mongolia and Iran.
Look at what OLPC group is producing! A child-hackable device with complete source code to all it’s software, and open specs to all hardware. This is a complete departure from the sealed kid-safe world that we lived in! These laptops are intended to be taken apart and reconfigured. I’m sure that they will be hacked up and used in all sorts of ways from distance education to smart bombs. Yes, this technology is dangerous! That’s why it needs to be in everyone’s hands: so the dictators of this world don’t have a monopoly on the worlds best technology…!
And religion is all really the same thing. Don’t you think the pope in Rome needs to loose a little more power? But allowing them the freedom to choose a religion of their choice doesn’t mean that the will all see eye to eye. A Muslim’s biggest death threat today is their own people. Zeal is dangerous? Does that mean we should outlaw the existence of passion? I think I saw a Star Trek episode on that. It pretty much came to the same conclusion I’m coming to: We are free people who have the right to choice. Even at the point of a gun nobody can take that away from us!
In recent history we learned about this from Hitler and the Jews. The only way Hitler could have won was to wipe the memory of the Jew out of the minds of his own troops. Extermination wasn’t enough! In modern times the “Got Mit Uns” belt buckle leaves an impression that to-this-day angers Jews against Christians. And it should! The German Christians behaved barbarically…
Perhaps giving children the right to make informed choices is the only way to prevent such tyranny in the future. I’m a Christian who practices Judaism. That’s an informed choice I’ve made. I’d love to see more people turn to the religion that Jesus lived. But each person has to know and choose his life. Not because I say so but because they can see the facts line up. I’m a firm believer in facts lining up. And while there is a lot of possibility for problem there is a good dose of balance that has been put into the program to make sure that nobody can control it. I’ve not seen any effort whether corporate, private, or religious which has successfully undertaken to give so much power to it’s consumers. Perhaps some would like to stay in the age of tyranny but I’m all for giving freedom a go. If OLPC will aid us in getting that choice out to the world I’m interested in it…
Rodney Giles
13 May 07 at 18:37
Wow, it seems like “the geeks will inherit the earth”!
There are a lot of “needs” above a laptop - like surviving to reach age 5. I really would love to see the basic needs of individuals met before this luxury item hits the streets.
I do agree with Rodney in some respects - hard to see how these children are going to keep their laptop for long when their families need food, water, medicines and have nothing to pay for them.
My daughter read about the $10 laptop a couple of months ago - I think the small netbook will hit the west in a big way before the wind-up/solar laptop reaches Africa…
Chris
Djembe Drums - all Fair trade products
Chris Barton
1 Apr 09 at 13:44