OLPC - "eaten my homework"

[Ben Scott]

On 5/30/06, Jeff Kinz <jkinz at kinz.org> wrote:
>>   Books can rot or be damaged; so can equipment.  I doubt there's any
>> real data as to which would be more durable in the target environment.
>>  Lacking data, we can't say one way or the other.
>
> Given the number of times I've seen USB keys ...

  A USB key isn't anything like a laptop, even a rugged laptop with
"no" moving parts (the hinge moves, and will be broken frequently, if
my experience with laptops in "safe" office settings is any
indicator).  That's not data, that's a bad comparison.

> The cost of producing a good textbook, even if the licensing/royalties
> are zero, is very high.

  Source?  Numbers?  Hard data?

  While I've never printed a text book, per se, I have been near the
production of other printed matter, and with sufficiently high
volumes, costs go under a dollar, even with hundreds of pages.  Of
course, I would expect a durable text book to cost more.  But even if
it costs *ten times* as much, we're talking $10.

> The virtual storage capability of the OLPC is, in some ways, nearly
> infinite.

  And, in most ways, 500 megabytes.  The mesh network is a nice
concept, but I don't really see it spanning the continent of Africa
any time soon.  If it manages to sustain a working network in local
communities, I think one can call that a huge success.

  I say this mostly as a reality check; as I said, the cost of the
electronic storage alone is likely to be insignificant.

> I'd say that the break even number could possibly be a lot lower than
> 100 books.

  No offense, but that seems like pure speculation to me.  It could
possibly be lower than 100 books if books are really really expensive
and laptops are really really cheap and all the good things happen for
the laptops and all the bad things happen for the books.  What if we
look at it realistically?

>>   Whether or not the 100 texts (printed or electronic) will actually
>> make it to the people, or actually be used if they do make it, is
>> another question.
>
> Yes, also we have no of knowing how much benefit people will get from
> software that helps teach reading, math etc, or better access to other
> knowledge and how many "book equivalents" that functionality is worth.

  There is lots of data available on CBT.  (How much of that data is
unbiased (and not produced by those pushing CBTs), I don't know.)  My
above comment was directed more at political issues and other
unexpected problems.  For example, many people starve not because
there is no food, but because various groups and factors prevent the
food from being evenly distributed.  Or maybe the laptops just end up
being used as light sources.  ;-)

-- Ben