Thank you for your support. On Dec 29, 2007 1:42 AM, Antoine van Gelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nicole Lee wrote: > > OLPC is not here to be a corporation, and > > placing too much emphasis on G1G1 and similar programs is a risky move, > > because it puts OLPC down the path towards competitive business.
Well, it's a distraction. > If I may summarize from what I understand: > > > Goal of corporation: "Make money now and in the future" > Measurement of corporation: $$$.Number.of > > > Goal of OLPC: "Educating children now and in the future" > Measurement of OLPC: ChildrenEducated.Number.of > > > The OLPC goal is a little bit more complex than the corporate goal! :-D Not if you do the corporate dance correctly, that is by focusing on customer needs rather than financial and legislative shenanigans. > Up to a point G1G1 helps foster the goal of OLPC by: > > . Increasing the available pool of developers for the > platform which not only increases the utility (and > hence the value of the XO to the buyer) of the machine > but also grows the pool of evangelists for the XO. Yes. Although one can develop on an emulator, many prefer to do it hands on. > . Increasing the viability of the project in the eyes of the > citizenry and by extension the folk who take responsibility > for serving that citizenry. (Apologies to any Americans > on-list but I consider myself to be a citizen, not a > consumer! *grin.duck.run*) Yes, it is excellent PR. > . Bringing in some cash -> To be clear, afaik the idea has not > and for various reasons probably shouldn't be, to fund the > educational mission out of this money but rather through > the sales of laptops to groups who have a responsibility to > seeing that the citizenries children are educated. Is this > correct ? It doesn't bring in cash as currently organized, except for the very specific function of buying laptops for countries that can't afford them. OLPC has adequate cash from corporate donations. > . Availability of XO-1 through 'official' channels removes > much of the incentive of grey-marketeers to go parasitic > on the XO's ass. > > . Provides a channel for single-unit purchases in countries > where there is ZERO government/business/aid support for > OLPC's mission. Both points true. > . Does wonders for the mental health of our global democratic > community by giving the citizenry a channel for their > hard-earned money which goes to some purpose other than buying > some anonymous plutocrat another yacht. Now, now. The real boost for global governance will come from populations being able to communicate and coordinate. > Beyond a certain point G1G1 works against the goal of OLPC by: > > . Distracting OLPC staff who should be thinking about > educational issues (what must this software be able to do > to increase the pupil pass rate) into dealing with tech > support issues (why doesn't the XO-1 talk to BigRandomCorp's > wifi base station) that don't benefit the educational mission. Actually, these tech support issues are informing the documentation process. See OLPC Publications on the Wiki. > . Threatening (or being perceived as threatening) the market of > manufacturers of low cost computers. Possibly getting OLPC > entangled in distracting arguments about who has the cheapest, > lowest-cost computer rather than who has the laptop which can > _measurably_ increase the pass rate of children at school and > which can _certifiably_ deliver education to children without > any schools at all. Competition? I'm all for it. We can win any education bake-off on the merits. > . There may potentially be production capacity issues, although > to be fair, most folk given a choice between solving production > capacity problems by increasing production capacity or by > rate-limiting sales are not as short-sighted as South African > business executives. I'm currently working with a very forward-thinking Sarth Efricen business executive. > . Distracting OLPC staff who should be thinking about marketing > issues (how do we explain to government ministers that they're > going to be heroes when the teachers are no longer responsible > for spending 100% of their time holding pupil attentions and > will now be able to spend the bulk of that time answering the > questions of pupils who have specific problems) into thinking > about supply-chain issues (how do we get a XO-1 from Taiwan to > Newcastle faster than Steve Jobs can get a Macbook from a > regional warehouse to lower-Poughkeepsie.) The MIT and other engineers, Quanta production people, and so on are quite capable of resolving these issues. > /me tosses his vote for Ed Cherlin as President for G1G1 International > in the hat and idly wonders how long it takes to arrange a credit note > for half a billion dollars these days. We can get started with USD50,000 and a good relationship with a banker. With USD2.5 million, we could set up a *global* Web site and fulfillment organization, and order the first 10,000 units at USD200 each. On current form, that would cover one week's sales. :D I'm talking to possible angel investors and loan sources now. Pledges (donation or loan) accepted in any amount. How many XOs would you buy at $399, knowing that a child gets a second one? Would you buy more or fewer if the price were lower, and children got a fraction of an XO for each one you purchased? What volume would NGOs that you know buy in? Consider both immediate need and continuing programs. > - a > > -- > > "Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a > design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication > structure." > > - Melvin Conway -- Edward Cherlin Earth Treasury: End Poverty at a Profit http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay _______________________________________________ Olpc-open mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/olpc-open
