I totally agree :) Also, the way these ministers are hijacking this event for political mileage leaves a really bad impression.
While lifting "villagers out of poverty" is a rather tenuous proposition (and quite frankly, beyond the scope of a single "miracle" device), this tablet is definitely packed with potential, though not for the "poorest of the poor", where the most impact is needed in India. It will probably be a bigger success with talented kids who generally don't have access to laptops and tablets (think kids living in rural areas, with electricity, but without good schools) and they would benefit from having a "hacker-friendly" device. This is _not_ a significant fraction of India, but it is a sizeable population. -- Rahul On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Joyojeet Pal <joyojeet at gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with Yaw on this -- sure, it is great that this technology is so > cheap, and one can argue that similar such efforts have brought up new > technology innovations (Netbook etc) and various other benefits, what is > deeply problematic is the idea that this will solve the issues of > development in India, and Indian minister Kapil Sibal's announcing the > project as being some kind of a dig out of exclusion > (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/india-announces-35-tablet-computer-to-help-lift-villagers-out-of-poverty/2011/10/05/gIQAPT8PNL_story.html) > If you look at UNDP's latest HDI report on India, you may find that someone > should find this claim at least quixotic, given that the country ranks 119th > in the world for what ranks are worth. India as a state spends among the > lowest on education (3.6%) and healthcare (1.1%) and has an income > inequality problem that is by all measure growing yearly, gender inequity is > 0.748 (on a scale of the 'best' at 0.212 and 'worst' at 0.814). the average > Indian spends 4.4 years in formal schooling.. the list goes on and on. > i'm not saying this is not a significant achievement, my concern is tying > this to development in such a way, in fact specifically in the perception > that this could be the state's part in providing development in india. i > think it hurts the cause of folks working in this space at the very least. > > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Yaw Anokwa <yanokwa at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> the hype around this tablet is terrible. >> >> i think it's great to have cheaper technology, but android tablets, >> even cheap $35 android tablets, will not lift villagers out of >> poverty. i wish it were that easy... >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 15:49, Rahul Banerjee <banerjee at cs.washington.edu> >> wrote: >> > Sorry for the spam, but I couldn't resist sharing such wonderful news: >> > >> > http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/India-announces-35-tablet-computer-for-rural-poor-2203509.php >> > >> > (Actually, the government is subsidising its price (which would be >> > closer to $50), but it's still pretty amazing that something like this >> > exists at all) >> > >> > -- >> > Rahul >> > _______________________________________________ >> > change mailing list >> > change at change.washington.edu >> > http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> change mailing list >> change at change.washington.edu >> http://changemm.cs.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/change > >
