Talk:Concerns and criticism

From OLPC
Revision as of 22:41, 6 December 2006 by Docdtv (talk | contribs) (Resettle discussion interspersed into article here; talk to same.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Etiquette note

This DISCUSSION/TALK page is how one debates and criticizes the related article. Having contrary points of view interspersed within the ARTICLE itself, especially when they are unsigned, only confuses an attempt to write coherent essays! If you want to add an extended statement to the article itself, please feel free to begin a new section within it. Or even create an entirely NEW ARTICLE, if you prefer. Thanks! - Docdtv 21:41, 6 December 2006 (EST)


"Reasons like those above are why I would like the overall OLPC effort to concentrate on developing quality e-books for the kids..." - docdtv

This is one of the key reasons for the OLPC project. However, the developers did not just stop with an ebook reader because they realized that with a bit more work the device could be leveraged as a general purpose computer with capabilities beyond that of traditional laptops. Ebooks are enough to justify the cost of the device but a smart ministry of education will make use of some of the other capabilities. - an unsigned party

Sorry, I don't agree the OLPC machine is only a "bit more work" than an e-book reader; but my point has nothing to do with engineering. My point is that institutional reform is much harder than engineering design. No matter how capable or cheap some machinery is, it does no good unless people use it. I am not terribly optimistic based on what I've seen to date in typical places in the USA. - Docdtv 21:41, 6 December 2006 (EST)


"McKinsey Inc. did a well-known study of the growth of USA business productivity in the late 1990s..." - docdtv

You stated that productivity increases resulted because of improvements in operations. That word, "operations" really means communication because in business, to operate effectively you need to communicate effectively. As you stated, Indian students felt that their education did not offer enough opportunities for communication. Have you failed to notice that the OLPC's long-range wireless and built-in chat application will give kids the opportunity for increased communication. Not just when they are gathered in groups after school but also when they are at home in the evening. And not just with the kids in their neighborhood but with kids that are further away as well. - an unsigned party

Yes, I am well acquainted with the technical specs of the machine, even if I do not follow them every week. (In fact, I posted the first comments on the hardware design back when this Wiki was rolled out at its original location, viz. http://pedia.media.mit.edu/wiki/One_Laptop_per_Child .) The cited [McKinsey report] speaks for itself, and cannot be boiled down to a single thing like interpersonal communication. While there are unusual children, my personal, admittedly limited, observation has been as I stated: that when left alone, kids are typically preoccupied with MMO twitch games, rather than serious learning through reading, conversation or writing online.

By the way, I'm not against games or high-tech telecommunication - but the latter is not required for educational gaming. As an example, I would cite a board game I played as a high school student over a third century ago, [Diplomacy]. While I had enough money to own an $8? game set, it might alternatively be played with mere sticks and stones on a dirt floor with nothing lost in the process. As the Wikipedia article writes:

The excitement of the game is less in the tactics than in negotiation, coalition-building, and intrigue. Each player's social and interpersonal skills are at least as important to the game as the player's strategic abilities.

We can argue how kids might use their OLPC machines outside of the school system, but the point I am making is that it is difficult to make new technology work within a school system, as is illustrated by someone with developing-world IT field experience [here].

- Docdtv 21:41, 6 December 2006 (EST)