Window to the world

I was reading an article about the One Laptop Per Child project the other day. Have you guys heard of the project? Nicholas Negroponte and a bunch of colleagues decided to come up with a laptop computer that could be produced for around $100 (it's ended up being closer to $200), and that governments of developing countries would buy them for the kids in their countries. By giving them laptops you'd give them a window to the world, and a way to communicate with the world. In the same way that having access to mobile phones increases the economic status of people in developing countries, giving kids laptops would open up a whole world to them that they otherwise would never have access to.

I was looking at the specs of the actual laptop (called the XO laptop) at laptop.org, and it looks amazing. Designed specifically for kids, with hardly any parts to wear out or break, the computer is so energy-efficient that it's going to be able to be recharged by the kids themselves (with a hand-crank or pull-cord). It has wireless range that's better than most laptops on the market, so kids will be able to network with each other and with the internet. It runs on Linux, and the software on it is open-source, so kids can modify as they see fit.

The problem is that a bunch of the countries that committed to buying them have backed out. So the One Laptop Per Child group has decided to run the Give 1 Get 1 promotion. From November 12 through November 26, people in North America can give US$399 (which is pretty much CA$399, as well) and get one XO laptop (otherwise not being released to the US and Canada) and have another one donated to the project.

Great, right? Because a laptop for $399 is still an amazing price, especially one that's going to last for so long and be specifically designed for kids to learn on. But what if we could get organized to do even more good with this project?

There are plenty of schools in underserved and underfunded areas of the US and Canada that have little access to technology, or massively outdated technology. These schools are lucky to have one 8-year-old computer per classroom, with outdated software and spotty internet access. Combine this with the fact that many of these same schools have 20-year-old textbooks, and you can see that these kids are at a distinct disadvantage. (For a well-laid-out argument about why giving students their own laptops instead of spending the same amount of money on notebooks and skinny markers and white-out pens makes a ton of sense, read this article.)

Obviously, the best-case scenario would be for schools/districts/the community to be able to buy each kid their own laptop. But even if that's not possible, what if corporations, religious and civic groups, or community groups could donate or raise the money to put a laptop cart or two in each of these schools? (A laptop cart is a rolling cart containing 30-35 laptops. Teachers can sign out the laptops for certain periods of time, and each kid in the class can have a laptop while doing that activity. It 's a great way to share within a school without forcing kids to share in the classroom during computer-related lessons.) Doing it during the Give 1 Get 1 promotion would cost $12,000-14,000 per cart. That amount of money is easily within the budget of some companies, churches, synagogues, and even private schools who could donate to an underfunded school in their area, and that money could be raised by other groups that don't have it on hand.

The problem is, there isn't much time. The promotion starts November 12, which means we have 40 days to troubleshoot this and get the funding together. Mull it over, post your objections in the comments, try to work out the kinks, and then let's break and go out to our local communities and start asking for money to give some kids the modern equivalent of the printing press.

(And don't forget to go put in your email address over at xogiving.org so they can remind you on November 12 to buy your own Give 1 Get 1 computer for your child.)

Comments

[Eva]

Well, I happen to disagree completely that what school kids the world over need is a bunch of computers. What they really need is LESS screen time, better, more objective, updated textbooks, better-trained teachers who have the time and resources they need to create excellent curricula, more exposure to the arts, and some kind of physical and nutritional education.

I think this whole thing is a waste of money, to be honest.

[Eva]

Oh, and safe environments. And clean water and good food.

[Ally]

I doubt that kids in developing countries don't have screen time to begin with, so I don't understand that argument.

Is there information about the availability of wireless in the target countries? I think this has the potential to be an effective program as the design of the laptops has already factored in existing barriers. But I wonder if a child would have to recharge it with a pull cord or a crank, if they would actually have wireless access.

[dot]

I think it's a great idea. I've been thinking about getting the rugrat a laptop he can bang on, this might be the opportunity.

[hedra]

The laptops have their own kind of network, even without wireless. I have NO idea how that works, but the people who designed these did do their homework.

I'm not sure that laptops will save the world, but I like that the free ones come loaded with, like, 1000 books. And they can be read in sunlight, or in the dark. The whole idea of giving a freakin' LIBRARY (a small one, but ANY) with each one is just astonishing. I think of it not as 'more screen time' but a different format of tools, all in one smaller package. Imperfect package, but not unreasonable at all. And being able to wind up your book at night so you can keep reading... that's cool. (Bonus on the native language translations, too.)

I haven't figured out how to proceed, yet. But it is in my mental hopper.

[Shandra]

I'm so torn on this project.

I've been following it for a while and I think it's so neat.

On the other hand I have vivid memories of having read "Small is Beautiful" in high school and although I think this project has thought quite a bit through on that front, I wonder how sustainable it really is - or if in 4 or 5 years, there will be a pile of plastic and toxic waste where a paper book might have lasted another 15 years. The fact that funding was pulled out so early is kind of a red flag to me there.

Or in other words, is a laptop really an appropriate intermediate technology - or at least one that I want to support.

I think the idea that they look so different to avoid the "grey market" is a bit crazed - the warlord who is going to market opium on the internet is not going to care if it's a bright green terminal his minions have gotten hold of.

I also worry about the lack of social framework for internet access - it's hard enough for me to keep up on the latest internet dangers; what happens when child slave traders can just send email to village kids inviting them to a party down the road? Or when they discover that uploading pictures of themselves will fill their paypal accounts?

So, thinking and reading today.

[Ally]

I just popped over to the site - not a lot of time to look right now, but wow to the fact that it creates its own network.

I like that it says on the website that this isn't a laptop project, it's an education project. Computers are like any other commodity - we can use them as a tool, for "good" purposes, or we can use them to waste time. This program has been well-thought out and I think it's an excellent use of technology.

[rudyinparis]

Interesting. What I'd really like is to get my hands on a real one and test it. The online demo only does so much.

There's a lot to think about here. I thought the same thing as Ally--what about wireless access? What if we were just sending hunks of what would amount to junk? Is this where to focus our energy or should, as Eva says, clean water and food be a priority?

I'm mixed. I signed up for the email reminder and I want DH to look at this--it could be a very cool Christmas present for Eldest and if the program is the real deal, and the tech issues (like the wireless question)are sufficiently answered then how great to send one along to another child, too.

People like to spend money on cool gadgets, I think many people like to do this more than they would like to give money for a well to be dug. So I suppose if someone wouldn't give anyway, but would buy one of these for the cause, then great. We can make the argument that kids in Africa need clean food and water more than a laptop, but if person X wouldn't give otherwise, what's the harm?

I'm still ruminating on this. Interested to hear what others say.

[anon]

To reach "the internet", there will still have to be a source of wireless in the town or village. (They're not *magic*). They will still be able to connect to one another, but the school is supposed to provide the main connection. Without that, they can only connect to other laptops, but that was the focus all along anyway.
i think it is a neat idea and will be interested to see what happens after five years. Will there be all these blogs by teenagers in rural Peru? Or will a bunch of little laptops have been sold to buy food? Will they be in disrepair, or perhaps still locked in the district office because of red tape? If there aren't enough to go around, will boys get them before girls do?
Projects like this (idea from industrialized country) are often busts. The number of tractor carcasses littering Africa, the broke-down irrigation systems...I'm skeptical too.
On the other hand the laptop sounds neat and I think it's dumb that they're selling so few in the USA. I think they'd really take off and inject cash into the project.

[Heather Caliri]

I tentatively like the idea that kids in developing countries could get hold of laptops; laptops in China--or Burma--have been creating more democracy, and more contact with the world. Imagine, for example, if more untouchables in India could participate in the tech revolution there.
However, I recently read an article in the NY Times about how ineffective school laptop programs have been. The laptops break down, kids use them to IM, and NOT to study, and they simply provide another distraction from class lectures. They produced no acheivement gains in the schools that spent so dearly to buy them.
So I wonder: how effective would the other end be, too? It _sounds_ like a neat idea, but I'm not sure technology is the panacea we want it to be.

[Eva]

The project still rubs me the wrong way. Its culturally imperialist, ethnocentric, inappropriately individualist approach to seems like an answer to the wrong question. I just can't see it working very well in many settings.

I worry about the kids who will be killed for their fancy laptops; for the teachers who won't know how to get kids to use them educationally and will find the laptops to be a big hassle that their principals enforce on them; what will happen to the kids who will find some way to break them and can't get replacements (and they WILL break them); for the books that won't be read in lieu of viewing some idiotic and poorly-written celbrity blog; and the human interaction that won't be had since the kids are IMing and watching music videos on YouTube.

Why not just work to outfit every school with a great library which has computers in it?

I say all this as a teacher, by the way, not some misanthropic Luddite who doesn't want kids to learn.

[hedra]

I have to agree with the cultural imperialism concerns. I did flash back to my philosophy of technology seminar... rather a lot, really. I think the books thing sways me still, though. But not sure if there isn't a better option, method, mode, etc.

I think probably the biggest 'cue' for me that I'm not going to pursue this further is that I didn't link it on the yahoo group that is for my mom's personal charitable fund (a vanguard charitable fund, but that my mom set up for us to 'play with her money' before she dies, so she gets to see it instead of missing out on all the fun after she's gone). Anyway, we're all link-happy at the moment, popping in links to all the cool shit we're interested in, that we support already or just want to support with her money. And, well, I went to go link their site, and... didn't. So I guess I'm not entirely comfy with it yet, either.

Meanwhile, since we're all in a give-y mood, check into other charitable groups, some of them do AMAZING work. Try www.charitywatch.org/toprated.html or www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm if you want to poke around and find where your bucks will get the most mileage. If the laptops idea moves you, then maybe take that motion and see where it goes?

We're heavily involved in the charitable world, though not entirely as donors. We don't have that much money (not even my mom, whose fund is pretty tiny). But we have time, and if I'm going to donate $20 to something (or $299), I want that money to work like crazy on something I care about. Kids, I care about. But in the past, I've supported Heifer International (which isn't even a totally top-rated agency, too much glossy paper cost, IIRC) for the same reasons.

More to mull, I guess.

[Erin]

As someone who works in conflict settings with displaced people, I'm cautiously optimistic that this program is a good idea.
Every child in a conflict setting that I have ever worked with has had a desire to learn... They may not believe that they would ever get to go to school, but they still relish opportunities to learn. Additionally, once a child can read and write, that can never be taken away from them. If these laptops can facilitate education in non-traditional settings - I'm all for it... The positive spill-over effects are potentially immense - better access to health care and other basic needs; mothers who have at least basic education have children who are healthier and who are more likely to be educated; better able to communicate with the outside world...

In answer to Eva's question about providing every school with a library: There are approximately 40-45 million children living in conflict-affected areas that are unable to attend school... Their school may no longer physically exist; there may be no teachers; girls, in particular, may be discouraged from attending school b/c the walk to school is too dangerous and tasks like fetching water and gathering fuel takes most of the day. Displaced adolescents (of which there are millions world-wide) are the most at-risk - even when there is primary education available, there is a severe lack of opportunity for secondary education, and displaced adolescents (again, particularly girls) often have responsibility for working and taking care of younger family members. There is a real need for non-traditional means of reaching these kids.

That said, I, too, have concerns about equitable access to the laptops between girls and boys and, also, the gray market issue...Design never stopped a determined seller.

[rebecca]

If I had the money, I'd be on the positive side of this. At least with respect to the basic concept of getting computers to kids. Hedra, I'd love to hear more about your philosophy of technology seminar, I should probably just google that and do a little reading.

Yes, I would love to see libraries in every school on every continent, and better teachers, and involved parents. However, I don't think that's reality. I understand the cultural imperialism argument, however, I also think the bad outweighs the good.

As the world marches on, computer skills are valuable. A connection with the outside world is valuable. Not the kind of connection that means a child in Africa will now know how much Paris Hilton's shoes cost. What I mean is that villages and towns are able to communicate, share information, share resources. Kids would have access to books that may never be added to their libraries. Medical information would be available in a way that is just not possible otherwise.

There used to be a guy who ran a site which was specifically for doctors in remote areas being able to network to share epidemiological concerns. I love this. Phones, memo pads, surface mail, etc. cannot match the internet for ease and speed when it comes to some types of communication. My take on it is that information is power. And kids and adults in other places/cultures will find ways to use an information tool that will suit their own uses. Even if it is "only" used to learn about healthcare or how to build a better house, that would be fantastic.

It would be naive to think there's not going to be an influx of crap info too and time spent on YouTube, but I think it's really possible to have it be a positive influence.

And having said *that*... if the laptops are to be used for class assignments and such, it would probably be a Very Good Idea to provide some kind of structure for how to use them and incorporate them. Perhaps setting up a structure for sharing lessons, online lessons, pooled resources, etc.

I'd rather give this program the benefit of the doubt. If it does well the repercussions and benefits could be amazing. I think the best thing we can do for our kids and other kids is to give them the tools to function and succeed in the world to come (not the world we wish for, but reality, although hopefully we can get those two things closer together).

Ok, enough from me. :)

[pnuts mama]

i'll admit that i haven't given this as much research as it deserves, but when i read words like "imperialist, individualist, ethnocentric" i get a little nervous that folks like us (and i include myself is "us"- people who are not only literate, but sitting comfortably with enough money to afford the luxury of any computer/internet access) come up with the old arguments of "don't give the poor/different color kids something nice because they'll just ruin/break it or sell it for drug/bad stuff money or read the garbage on the internet that we read also", well... i mean, that's just gross. and terribly unethical for countless reasons.

i believe that justice is based on fair distribution of the world's resources, including technological ones. i'm not throwing around communist or socialist philosophies, either, i just mean that it's easy for people who were lucky enough to be born into this life vs. that one to think we should control what others may or may not have access to, because we think we know better. perhaps the discussion needs to include views from people that have a comprehensive understanding of the socio-economic and educational effects of poverty on children/families/communities, etc.?

without knowing the details of the project, i have to say that i see enormous potential and justice for marginalized children around the world to get a little closer to the technological opportunities that my own child(ren) will have.

[hedra]

It's funny how the arguments go around, regarding the ethnocentrism thing... because in the philosophy of technology seminar (which I didn't give, but attended for grad school), it was the third-world-origin people who were infuriated, angry, hurt, offended over the degredation of their cultures and ideals through the influx of technology that had grown from other-culture roots. TV and computers didn't 'fit' with their cultural realities, and so their cultural realities were changing rapidly because the technology was indeed so cool that everyone wanted it, and got it, and ... then the changes happened, and there were no brakes, no time to consider, reflect, or be cautious. Too late.

Which is not to say that these same people wished for no technology, or reversions to old technology, or anything at all like that. They just wanted time, and control, and opportunity to set the pace, standards, inclusions, rules, and methods. They wanted to be able to determine if the boys got it first, because their culture supported that, no matter what westerners beleive is right. And with that comes the outrage back, the insistance that things be uniformly provided, that opportunities have no waterfall pattern and apply to all, including girls, something that is OUR ideal.

And so we end up wanting it both ways - we want to not impose and force a loss of what they hold sacred, except where we insist on imposing because we see it as a gain of what EVERYONE should hold sacred (dammit!).

Cultural sensitivity in transfer of technology is still a big deal. And if that's not recognized, a lot of waste can happen (I recall the likely apocryphal ...dang, how's that spelled?... story of the well-water system that was carefully set up by a charity organization in Africa, the men trained in its upkeep and maintenance, great rejoicing over the clean water system... and a year later, in disrepair because 'water is women's work' and the men would neither teach the women to do the repairs nor do them themselves. Probably made up, but that's the concern. That a simple error in execution will equal an immense waste of resources.)

I like to treat my charity giving as I do my investing, and this is a high-risk venture, IMHO - huge investment (mainly by the group who designed it), no track record, great idea, laudable ideals, ... and I'm not in a high-risk mode. But other investors *should* be high-risk (and high return possible), even if *I* am not, or not right now.

So, my caution isn't at all a reason for others to not take this on wholeheartedly. It is just too new, I think, for me to jump. I'm a lower-risk investor, when it comes to charity.

[hedra]

So, did more poking around... and I'm no longer worried about the cultural issue.

But whether to buy one of these? Or one of the Intel ones? or another maker? "Emerging market educational PC" is now, thanks to XO's laptop idea, a hot topic, with Intel promising to roll their version out to 30 countries in the near future. Which means that *this* (XO) non-profit has already done more to change the world than could have been expected, because now there's competition to create easy-to-use, indestructible, green, networked, energy-efficient laptops for kids in impoverished and low-infrastructure areas.

Huh. Cool.

[Menita]

Well, I've done a significant amount of work in some of the regions that would benefit most from the project and from Moxie's idea: the third world, and inner-city US.
Here's my two cents: sure, food, education, health are critical for these kids. But also critical are the tools that will allow them to connect to the rest of the world, especially those parts of the world that can help them, if only they knew their plight, and what they needed. As most people get their information on the web, not having access to a computer or the web makes you invisible. This is a question of access.
It today's world, not having access to a computer and the web also means that ways out of poverty, ways to tap into networks that could help you and your community are also out of your reach or severely curtailed.
Please, please if you can get on board with this project. Moxie, what I'd like to suggest is a PayPal fundraiser account on this site that those of us who are so minded could link to from our own sites. Whatever money is raised by the cutoff date could go to buy what we can for the kids you mention.

[Carmen]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned and correct any info if I'm wrong. I'm at work and can't devote much time to this... My husband has mentioned this project to me in the past and my understanding (through him) is that due to licensing agreement BS these laptops are not available in the US typically. So the idea of getting a bunch for our kids wouldn't work (unless of course you're suggesting to do the Give 1 Get 1 for all the laptops you're hoping to purchase for your community/school...) The reason my husband mentioned this to me is that he wanted one of these slick little laptops for his own use and I think he thought they weren't for purchase in the US...

[Moxie]

@Menita: I can't be the collector. If people want to donate, they should just donate at laptop.org. If they want to do the Give 1 Get 1, thet can do that individually if they want. I'm suggesting that people with connections to other groups that could raise enough money to give laptop carts to schools in the US and Canada start their own initiatives. There is no way under the sun I could organize this, and if all it is is people donating money, they can already do that at laptop.org. Unless someone wants to give the $12K it will take to buy a laptop cart for my child's school, in which case you should email me.;-)

@Carmen: Yes, I'm suggesting doing the Give 1 Get 1, because otherwise they're not available here.

@Eva: I think it's a pretty dangerous assumption that all the kids that could be reached by laptops have safe access to schools and teachers. And textbooks are so expensive and go out of date so quickly. Besides, what about all the stuff that isn't in textbooks? What about the teachers in little one-room schools who may have limited educations themselves but could learn along with the kids on the computers? It's not a perfect solution, but it's a window of hope, and it's better than what these kids have access to right now.

@Hedra and Ally and Shandra and anon: I think the real success of the program is going to come when a particular area can be so flooded with these laptops that there doesn't have to be rationing, and the computers are so ubiquitous that they're not that attractive on the black/grey market. I do wonder what's going to happen with these machines, and know not all of it will be positive, but I don't think we can withhold them and say "They're not ready for them" and think that that's helping anyone.

@Heather: What that NY Times article didn't describe was any methodology for researching how the one-to-one laptop programs had been implemented in schools, what software the teachers were using, how much training the teachers had had (were they just told "Let the kids use the laptops" and left to twist, as happens in so many schools and districts?). Without strong district support and a plan with buy-in at many different levels, most tech initiatives in K-12 schools are going to fail because no one's empowered to make maximum use of resources. It's not fair to say that one-to-one computing doesn't work if we don't have any idea what the implementation looked like.

[another Amy]

I have such mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I'm a teacher who has won awards and presented at conferences for technology use in the classroom, so you'd think I'd be all for it. But I'm leery of injecting American educational values into vastly different cultures. Who are we to think we know what's best for these children? Is the knowledge gained by accessing the Internet relevant to their lives? Will networking and such easy access to information steer them towards the too-fast culture we have created for ourselves? Do they WANT or NEED to be connected to the rest of the world? I'm afraid this global culture we (as members of Western civilization) are creating is destroying individual cultures.

[another Amy]

Oh, and about that NYT article (http://tinyurl.com/ywjtlr): I happen to be quite knowledgeable about the research surrounding 1:1 initiatives in the US. That article is extremely one-sided. One major point they miss is that these initiatives often underfund (or don't fund at all) a research component--so no one really knows what is successful and why. There are several studies in the works right now that are showing much better effects than what the NYT reports. There are many very successful 1:1 programs. Although I guess that depends on how you define "successful", doesn't it?

[Gretchen]

In case anyone wonders how the kids feel about this, there was a review of the hardware by a 12-year-old posted here:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1187

Oh, and if nobody realized it, today is Delurk Day, so I'm glad to see so many people leaving their 2-cents in Moxie's comments! Find out more about the Delurk Day (which I didn't start, but am participating in) at http://mind-flush.blogspot.com .

[Ally]

I am having trouble navigating the site, as it was developed more with an eye to design rather than functionality...sigh, OT, but the developers I work with professionally often run into the same traps.

Anyway, the quotes from users are all from the same school in Nigeria, so my guess is the donations are targeted until all the children in a single village have one?

Honestly, the black market problem didn't occur to me. Neither did the issues with how they are distributed. But I keep going back to what Menita has said so well- that not having access to a computer or the web makes you invisible.

[Ali]

What I think about every time I read about these laptops is the news stories and photos that pop up here and there about high-school and university students in various developing countries who spend their nights sitting next to runways at airports in order to study: they have no electricity or fuel for lighting in their homes, so they gather to use the surplus light where it's available.

To me what's most amazing about these laptops is that they are infrastructure-independent. You don't need electricity to get it running, and you don't need artificial light to study & communicate. The difference that makes is impossible to understate.

Also I'd add that even if you were concerned about kids using these to 'slack off' rather than learn- slacking off on a computer is still acquiring generally applicable computer skills. Kids who IM constantly have amazing and highly employable typing speeds & accuracy, as one example- kids obsessed with myspace can get pretty good at their HTML & javascript programming. It doesn't really matter if you're reading a comic book, your maths text book, or the long-range weather forecast when what you're learning is how to operate a mouse, a scroll bar and a program interface. What I mean is, computer literacy is in itself a valuable literacy end-goal and a worthwhile strategy for reducing the opportunity gap.

[shirky]

if the countries are cancelling orders, maybe they've decided the program is not good for them right now?

[JB]

If it's too dangerous for kids to get to school, or the girls are discouraged from going, what makes you think these laptops will be more accessible to those children than books at school would be? Those kids who can't get there won't have access to the network. They won't have the learning to read the books that are downloaded to the laptop. If they get a laptop at all (i.e. if they are not distributed through schools in the first place), they will have a virtually unusable hunk of plastic. "Computers are more accessible than libraries" doesn't work for me.

My main hesitation is that even in the US, kids cannot learn -- literally are unable to learn -- if they are hungry and sick, if they're falling asleep in class from hunger or have parasites or sores. If we sent laptops to areas where these basic needs have already been met, I think it would work better. So I sponsor kids through World Vision and Half the Sky, and send money through Heifer, and figure the technology can build on that.

[hedra]

shirky, some of the cancellations are to swap to other systems that are more 'upward/crosswise compatible' (Russis declined to participate because the systems are not Windows based, and they need technology experience in Windows, and don't expect the Linux experience to be easily transferred). And some countries are buying in heavily, but to multiple systems (even one of the big XO buying countries in latin america, can't recall which one, is buying from various vendors so they can seed the process with as many DIFFERENT options as possible, to try to avoid the all eggs in one basket problem).

JB, Ditto with Heifer. And some of the hardware companies are IMHO doing a better job of trying to get things going locally - local construction, local support, infrastructure development, training, helpdesk, and resources, all tied together. I am a big fan of working local.

[Cat, Galloping]

From the NY Times:

No, the biggest obstacle to the XO’s success is not technology — it’s already a wonder — but fear. Overseas ministers of education fear that changing the status quo might risk their jobs. Big-name computer makers fear that the XO will steal away an overlooked two-billion-person market. Critics fear that the poorest countries need food, malaria protection and clean water far more than computers.

(The founder, Nicholas Negroponte’s, response: “Nobody I know would say, ‘By the way, let’s hold off on education.’ Education happens to be a solution to all of those same problems.”)

[Moxie]

Cat, I was just about to post the link to that whole article. It really could hardly be more glowing about the XO and what it can and can't do:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/04pogue.html?ex=1349150400&en=12d8a1ff28c4df27&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[Shandra]

*reading all the comments* *still haven't decided what I think*

There is definitely a grey and fine line between "withholding generous donations because of prejudice or fear" and "deciding this doesn't sound right to me for reasonable reasons."

The visibility issue is an interesting one, but I have mixed feelings about children being visible on the Internet. If we were talking about a laptop for every nurse and midwife or something, I would definitely feel differently.

What I didn't like was the Negroponte quote about education, because laptops are not synonymous with education. The quote about fear is definitely the words of an empassioned advocate, but I don't particularly appreciate the characterization as it seems to divide people into two black and white camps: visionaries who support the project, and fearful people who don't.

I was heavily involved in a programme to create a computer lab for at-risk youth at one point. Once porn was banned from the lab, it was empty.