On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:06:07AM -0700, Thaths wrote: > On 8/1/07, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's a good idea if it kills less trees (reduces costs, books are expensive > > and heavy). It would be an even greater idea if we had decent educational > > software. > > Both are big 'ifs'. Textbooks are actually not that expensive in
100 GByte is a lot of dead tree, if printed (some 10 t, conservatively estimated). No child should lug several tons of it around, even if there were enough trees (there aren't). And why settle for anything less than replicating national-scale facilities in every village, or backpack? > places like India. And I am yet to come across any decent educational Textbooks are expensive everywhere. It's a question of how many of them you want. > software. Agree very much, and see it as a challenge, not a nail into the coffin. Turning textbook writers into eduware authors is difficult. > > Today's notebooks are pure steampunk to what is yet to come. > > Ummm. Isn't any day's technology pure steampunk to what is yet to come? Many forget, so it never hurts to remind them. Same thing with the price tag and environmental footprint of current electronics: the equation looks completely different with molecular components and desktop fabs. Current notebooks are environment pigs, though making 10 t of processed cellulose is nothing to sneeze at.
