Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
Top Posters
- Arkady 5356
- miss annie 5139
- andy 4506
- Ali 3400
- krappyrubsnif 3205
- tosscat 2291
- David 2179
- ADGS 1875
- kreuzkav 1732
- Mirandola 1618
$100 Laptop part two: An article that made me furious
<a href="http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/The100DollarLaptop.aspx">What went wrong with the $100 Laptop</a>
To quote andy, Full of Wrong.
"Believers in the concept that computers will solve all the world's ills"
Or, up the standards of education, or at least provide something along the lines of a resources. I remember a story about Third world children and how happy they were about pencils
"doesn't appear that the manufacturing cost of these machines has come anywhere close to $100"
For someone who writes for MSN Money, it never occured to him about expotential costs and savings on larger scale production?
"It's also iffy whether these machines are going to do anyone any good"
Fact? Any fact?
"And in today's world the real value of a computer is it being networked," says Zachary. "Finding a network in the poor areas is either impossible or very expensive.""
Obviously not ANY FUNDEMENTAL RESEARCH into the subject, as even I know the laptop creates ad-hoc network automatically when in proximaty. Thus, *SHOCK* the classroom of kids will be networked!!!!!111oneone
"The basic argument is that with $100 you could almost feed a village for a year, so why waste that sum on a laptop? What are they thinking?"
Teach a man, feed a man. As for this charitable fund, the payment is likely to be funded through charitable means, meaning very little cost to the people or their governments.
"The fact that these people need electricity more than they need a laptop is only part of the problem,"
Errr... they are powered by a generator. And they are surviving without a national powergrid, bills through the post, and a TV in the corner. Clean water, they need, true. I'm not liking the tone of this article.
"Let's face it: These high-tech gems are a laughable addition to a mud hut."
RACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACIST
RACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACIST
ASSHOLE
"there is a creepy anecdote -- related as if it exemplified a positive benefit -- about how some poor family in Cambodia used the hand-cranked laptop's screen as a source of light for their abode."
This stopped being journalism a long time ago. Now dealing with anecdotes, over negative possibilites and muck-racking.
I also had to look up what the fuck "mind-share" meant. Basically meaning "This idea detracts from a magic-bullet solution, so we shouldn't do anything until one comes along"
This article has made me so angry.
To quote andy, Full of Wrong.
"Believers in the concept that computers will solve all the world's ills"
Or, up the standards of education, or at least provide something along the lines of a resources. I remember a story about Third world children and how happy they were about pencils
"doesn't appear that the manufacturing cost of these machines has come anywhere close to $100"
For someone who writes for MSN Money, it never occured to him about expotential costs and savings on larger scale production?
"It's also iffy whether these machines are going to do anyone any good"
Fact? Any fact?
"And in today's world the real value of a computer is it being networked," says Zachary. "Finding a network in the poor areas is either impossible or very expensive.""
Obviously not ANY FUNDEMENTAL RESEARCH into the subject, as even I know the laptop creates ad-hoc network automatically when in proximaty. Thus, *SHOCK* the classroom of kids will be networked!!!!!111oneone
"The basic argument is that with $100 you could almost feed a village for a year, so why waste that sum on a laptop? What are they thinking?"
Teach a man, feed a man. As for this charitable fund, the payment is likely to be funded through charitable means, meaning very little cost to the people or their governments.
"The fact that these people need electricity more than they need a laptop is only part of the problem,"
Errr... they are powered by a generator. And they are surviving without a national powergrid, bills through the post, and a TV in the corner. Clean water, they need, true. I'm not liking the tone of this article.
"Let's face it: These high-tech gems are a laughable addition to a mud hut."
RACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACIST
RACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTRACIST
ASSHOLE
"there is a creepy anecdote -- related as if it exemplified a positive benefit -- about how some poor family in Cambodia used the hand-cranked laptop's screen as a source of light for their abode."
This stopped being journalism a long time ago. Now dealing with anecdotes, over negative possibilites and muck-racking.
I also had to look up what the fuck "mind-share" meant. Basically meaning "This idea detracts from a magic-bullet solution, so we shouldn't do anything until one comes along"
This article has made me so angry.