Problems with the $100 laptop

Problems with the OLPC approach

Lee Felsenstein

Fonly Institute

lee@fonlyinstitute.com

10 Nov. 2005

 

Top down structure

 

The One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project (http://laptop.media.mit.edu/) rests upon a fundamental assumption that the creation and widespread distribution of a single type of computer will solve the problem of the “digital divide” in the developing world. By creating a laptop computer priced at $100 each (when sold in quantities of millions), the thinking goes, schoolchildren throughout the developing world will all be equipped with powerful tools for learning and exploration.

 

The educational theories behind this approach were developed by Alan Kay and Seymour Papert starting in the 1970's, and gave us both the LOGO language (Papert) and the concept of the laptop computer (Kay's Dynabook). While their work led to important advances in the shape and use of computers, it has not been generally validated as bringing about new paradigms of child learning. Children do not go out to play bringing along their laptops, and have not been generally observed to create LOGO programs spontaneously.

 

By marketing the idea to governments and large corporations, the OLPC project adopts a top-down structure. So far as can be seen, no studies are being done among the target user populations to verify the concepts of the hardware, software and cultural constructs.  Despite the fact that neither the children, their schools nor their parents will have anything to say in the creation of the design, large orders of multi-million units are planned.

 

Distribution problems

 

This represents a particularly striking form of a command economy where a market economy is an absolute necessity. The history of command industrial economies, like that of the former Soviet Union, shows that informal mechanisms of distribution develop unbidden. Gray markets (for items legally obtained) and black markets (for illegally obtained merchandise) come into operation. For this reason, among others,  we can expect the OLPC laptops to gravitate toward other segments of the population, where money and influence may be available but where budgets are still tight enough to place standard laptops out of reach.

 

The truth of  the assertion that through distinctive design the OLPC laptops will be rendered safe from theft or misappropriation depends upon the moral calculus of the appropriators. So long as they are capable of browser access, the laptops will have value in commercial use. If they can be had, competitive forces will create pressure for businesses to avail themselves of the new tool, as has so far happened with pirated software.

 

It is also reasonable to predict a reaction against the concept in recipient families. In developing societies children are perceived to have a place in helping the family advance, not in racing ahead and leaving the family behind. Unless it is evident that the laptop will improve the prospects of the family then support within the family may not be forthcoming, and the laptop will more likely be converted to cash.

 

It would seem apparent that serious social research must be done to determine family, village and societal attitudes before proceeding with a program like OLPC.

 

Hardware issues – power generation

 

But what of the absence of reliable electrical power? OLPC statements refer to the hand-cranked generator included in each unit, having a ratio of 100:1 for operating time to crank time. For an optimistically low power drain of 1 watt this implies a 100 watt generator.

 

A hand crank of 6 inch (15.24 cm) length operating at 2 turns per second would require a tangential force of 11.8 pounds (5.3 kg), assuming 100% efficiency of generation and storage. This would tire a strong adult quite rapidly. It would seem apparent that the figure of 100:1 was arrived at by means other than calculation.

 

Hardware issues – mesh networking

 

Questions about connectivity of the OLPC laptop are answered by referring to the wireless mesh networking capability to be built into the device. Each one will link to others nearby, which in turn will link to others until finally one links to something connected to the Internet, whereupon all of the other laptops pass their data through the final link.

 

This is a nice idea where the “Internet cloud” is reasonably pervasive and only the final 100 meters remain to be bridged. It will not work so well where the distance to the cloud is in the region of tens of kilometers and where that link is not a broadband connection and not reliable due to power outages.

 

Also, mesh networking depends upon most of the links being operational whenever connectivity is needed. Are we to assume that all of the OLPC laptops will be left running, especially when the effort of battery charging is considerable? Much more likely is that the laptops will have connectivity only in districts of cities where power is reliable and where higher-bandwidth channels are available through wireless access.

 

Infrastructure and alternatives

 

It is not advisable to implement technological systems with inadequate infrastructural support. In the case of the OLPC laptop, the lack of power and Internet backhaul capability will present a serious impediment. This problem can be addressed by the large-scale implementation of community ICT systems, which bring immediate economic benefits in terms of extending telecommunications, agricultural information, telemedicine and e-government functions.

 

In the literature of the OLPC project such suggestions have been brushed aside with the comment that “one does not normally think of community pencils”. Of course, one does not normally think of pencils costing $100 each, and which soak up money needed for traditional pencils. Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa tells of how in Rwanda his schoolteacher had the pupils write on their legs using thorns. Pencils can be quite precious, and in poor schools are indeed treated as community resources.

 

Once stationary community systems become widespread, bringing the Internet (with attendant local wireless access) and reliable low-wattage electrical power capabilities, the ground will be ready for the kinds of laptops described by OLPC. But in that case a diverse marketplace involving a range of types and uses, forms and allocation of the laptops should be in operation.

 

The OLPC methodology is far too rigid to succeed at its stated goals. If it goes forward as currently described, the laptops will most likely wind up in other than students' hands, in areas where infrastructure is more likely to be adequate. The content of material available through the laptop is likely to involve advertising merchandise to audiences more likely to have discretionary money.

 

It is sufficiently discomfiting to consider that the outcome of a massive project like OLPC may be a different form of commercial television for the developing countries. Worse yet would be the preemption of funding for many other projects designed under a community model. Future talk of computer systems for the developing world would meet the dismissive response that “it's been tried and it failed”.

 

Conclusion

 

The time will certainly come when the appropriate tool to promote economic development will be a laptop produced very inexpensively in large volume. Before that point it will be necessary to implement systems that provide infrastructure which the laptop will need, in addition to producing tangible economic benefits for their users. OLPC is to be commended for raising issues and focusing attention, and for posing some technological challenges in a highly visible way.

 

However, the “can do” approach taken by OLPC points in the wrong direction. The solution is not proven to be appropriate, and the distribution model is open to challenge.  Despite this, large sums of money are to be committed to the project in advance to fund manufacturing in deals where the customers are government ministries and not the end users.

 

It is important to begin discussions now that question assumptions and that are open to alternate approaches, lest the outcome be one that diminishes equitable development and that poisons the public trust in ICT as applied in pursuit of the Millennium Development Goals to reduce poverty.

(This is the first of a series of posts on this topic.)

Comments

[Julia]

I was going to get one $ 100 computer for my child and a next one - for me - I think I'll do that there in cheap laptops shop at http://www.portableuniverse.co.uk
problems are as small as a price )

[Andrés Núñez Leites]

Hello all. I'm a sociologist and school teacher from Uruguay, and I have to agree with your diagnostics. Here, the OLPC plan was implemented, and from the pedagogical point of view, it is a failure. Children without maths and language text books have now got laptops most of the times without internet. When they have, connection is too slow to work properly in class-time. Wireless signal it is not strong enough, so they can't connect from home. Mesh networks only allow 6 ó 7 simultaneous connections; internet access only 60. Besides, this false-constructivist aproach has deepened the confusion between proliferation of superficial information and real knowledge (which means theorethical-logical connections and hierarchies). This is a bad bussiness for children and poor families, but a very good one for OLPC and local government propaganda. Not to talk about the possible violation of GNU copylefts as the final user can't administrate the sistem. A shame. Greetings

[jptheo]

With all the advancements in mobile technology.. What if each child had a smartphone or a netbook? Current subscribers could be asked for donations monthly to accomplish this idea.

jptheo

[danial]

good blog

[Hossrex]

This is all shortsighted nonsense, saying we should put the cart ahead of the horse.

You repeatedly complain about the laptops "finding their way" into unintended hands, yet licenses that required the computer to connect to its home network (i.e. the school from which it was given) have been part of the equation from the beginning.

(LF comments - Unfortunately, every technical security measure has a countermeasure, so I do not agree that the issue has been definitively answered. Also, I disagree that I have "repeatedly complain[ed]" about this as if it were my fundamental argument.)

You repeatedly make reference to there being no infrastructure for wireless internet. Why would there be? There aren't any computers. Do you understand basic macro-economics? It'd be foolish to build wireless internet transmitters before anyone has a computer. If you deny them computers because there is no internet, no one will ever build the transmitters. You need to get the computers out there, PUT THE DEMAND OUT THERE, and the supply will follow.

(LF comments - The demand would have to have an economic basis - there would have to be money on the table - and the time required to build out the infrastructure would mean that several years [at least] would elapse before the demand were met if it happened at all. How well do you understand economics?)

You're making the mistake of assuming the ENTIRE ENDEAVOR is socialistic. The principles of it are socialist, but Negroponte understands we don't live in a perfect world, so he's put together an idea that philanthropically helps people, while still considering the hedonistic world.

(LF comments - I have no problem with the supposedly socialistic aspect of this or other programs. I do have a problem with the authoritarian aspect - every kid required to have a laptop [or else what?] - and the opportunities and incentives for evasion and corruption that ensue.)

In closing... consider this...

Would there be a city in America with blanket internet access, if people didn't ALREADY have computers? Why not? Because without the computers, there's no reason to do it.

(LF comments - Please name a city in America with blanket internet access. If you mean wireless, the answer is none. Some have made starting moves, but none have been completed because the economics aren't there. Google is funding the effort in Mountain View, CA. Your argument that infrastructure will arise simply because of the presence of laptops cannot be supported.)

Your entire point is predicated on a very basic fallacy, and by fixing nothing more than the basic logical failing you've made, this project looks much more encouraging.

Your entire point is EXACTLY the same as saying "since the kids can't read, why should we give them books?" Well... if we don't give them books, how can they learn to read?

(LF comments - The question you pose would make sense only if the intended end result of OLPC were kids learning the use of computers. However, this was never the case - Negroponte claimed that having the laptops would cause the kids to "learn learning" and rush ahead of the educational system on their own. No support has been demonstrated for this proposition, though certainly kids are happy to have a shiny new toy that takes pictures and plays music. My point has been that the hard work of courseware and curriculum development was ignored by OLPC's approach and the lack of it would prevent success, along with lack of support from families.)

Stop looking at the world through your upper middle class goggles.

(LF comments - And through what goggles do you view the world?)

[Tracy Roy]

This idea seemed to be of advantage for many individuals and if this will be implemented, the advent of technology will sure to skyrocket more and more. They just need to make sure they're going to provide not just cheap laptops.

http://computer-trend.com

[Gareth Parfitt]

Great site, very helpful

[Mike]

One Laptop Per Child project is really a very nobel idea. Nice post covering all aspects related to the project.

Wishing Goodluck to this project!

As a computer dealer, can I be of any help to the project? Readers can mail me there suggestions @ acinc.michigan@gmail.com.

Regards,
Mike
http://www.acinc.com/

[William Webb]

It's a good idea however, we should all try to recycle more. I'm sure equipment already in circulation could be put to better use.

If you are in the UK you can find sources to buy laptops for under £100 which you can use for most basic word processsing and web browsing needs.

[ww verzekering]

It is quit interesting debate concerning usefulness of One Laptop Per Child project. Thanks

[Nico Sap]

Thanks for this interesting read...
I thought a knew a lot about olpc, but appearently, not everything!

[Denver PC Guy]

Very interesting. I had seen all the billboards and such. I felt that there must have been issues that I didn't see, this article pointed them out. I spend time in third world countries, and can see that there are issues.

Thanks for the article

[Michael]

Netbook vs OLPC. I think we have to say "bye-bye" to OLPC.

[Increase Penis Size]

This comment only for the blog owner i just want to thanks this guy. becoz of i get lots of information form it.

[docsharp01]

I was thinking about the small computer, the EEEPC, as the frontier of the computing industry. It might surpass the $100 laptop computer, but only time will tell.
http://www.pc-satellite-tv-reviews.com
http://www.ipod-repair-guide.com
http://www.high-speed-internet-access.net

[Cheap Computer Memory]

Very interesting read. Thank you.

OLPC cannot survive due to the tough competition from intel. Also with the release of the ASUS EEPC and the HP Mininote, no one would want to buy the uglier and bulkier OLPC machines when the other two are much prettier and almost of the same size.

[Online Gambling]

I enjoy readin your posts. I don't see a problem with the $100 laptop, even if the recipients sell it to put food on the table. Their are some very poor people in this world that need whatever help that they can get. Some would much rather have $100 worth of rice or food than a laptop.

[Online Shopping Deals]

Interesting article... let's see how long the project lasts.

[Kurt W. G. Matthies]

Thank you Lee. Though well intentioned, OLPC seems a little foolish in many settings.

Just how are we, as professionals in engineering, computer science, mathematics, and the other intellectual disciplines relative to our field, qualified to select appropriate tools for developing cultures?

Poor Richard comes to mind with this solution to the worlds' problems. "When all you have is a Silicon Valley perspective, every solution looks like a computer."

I suspect that a good portion of these computers will be traded for daily necessities.

If we truly want to help the people of under developed countries, there are actions that would be more immediately beneficial. For instance, let's get the World Bank and IMF to work and relief debt in developing countries. Instead of computers, let's get fresh, clean drinking to each village--why, even to each household! It's been done before, you know. To help the hungry, let's create international coalitions against the greedy practice of "seed patents" which attempt to claim patents on the work of millions of years of evolution, and prohibit the small farmer from saving seeds for next years' planting. Without these seeds, many will starve.

Progress in these three areas will bring tangible progress in the effort to improve the daily quality of life of these people.

Think small -- relief from economic slavery, clean drinking water, and food in the barn.

[That Stefan Kid]

"In developing societies children are perceived to have a place in helping the family advance..."

yes they are perceived to be like this. yet how can we know, unless we have actually witnessed this/lived among them. Do you have any experience with their society and culture? (Not an accusation there, just an honest question)
And would a parent not be proud/happy for their child to exceed? their living conditions not necessarily being the best, I'm sure they would love to see their child be able to excel and be given a better opportunity. This laptop may provide that. (I stress 'may')

Still, a very well thought out argument. :)

[PBX Phone System]

Excellent comments and article about the problems with the $100 laptop. As far as infrastructure from phone companies, a PBX Phone System should be used because it offers cost savings on internal phone calls.
http://www.1-satellite-tv-facts.com/Phone-Systems.ht

[tony]

YOUR STUFF Sucks

(OK, that's a start, now could you tell us why it sucks? I've never had any response from OLPC, and this might be it, so I'm very interested to see your arguments - LF)

[Cheap laptops]

I have been thinking about upgrading my computer the last few weeks but there is so much choice that it is hard to tell if youre making the right descission. Its nice to be able to search around the internet myself for the informaiton I need rather than being force fed by a salesman!

(Good luck, gedgec! But I doubt that this site can be of much help to you - Lee)

[Steve]

Well, looks like you were right. We now have two OLPC XO models at our school and they are a mess.

Children everywhere need to learn to read and write the language of their culture. There is nothing on the XO that helps with that.

The browser doesn't work well and the word processor doesn't either. And these are the only two programs out of over a dozen that ship with the XO that might help with literacy education.

Why in the world would you include a terminal app Python programming language interpreter and ADSR envelope tone module apps with a child's laptop, for example?

There won't be studies of the XO's effectiveness in learning sponsored by the OLPC, unless they are willing to admit... This thing is DOA!

[Bill Clawson]

Does anybody have an opinion on the Solo computer concept from explan in the UK? Its market driven to build low cost, low power consumption, solar PC's in the target countries.

http://www.explan.co.uk/solo/index.shtml