FYI - we need to talk to these people.
Global Text Project
* The goal is to create a free library of 1,000 electronic textbooks for students in the developing world * The library will cover the range of topics typically encountered in the first two years of a university's undergraduate programs * The global academic community and global corporations will be engaged in creating and sponsoring this library
The project will create open content electronic textbooks that will be freely available from a Web site. Distribution will also be possible via paper, CD, or DVD. Our goal initially is to focus on content development and Web distribution, and we will work with relevant authorities to facilitate dissemination by other means when bandwidth is unavailable or inadequate. Thus, while the goal, educating the disadvantaged, is the same as that of the $100 laptop project, we are not tied to a particular device or medium.
We have experience with developing a free textbook, XML: Managing Data Exchange. This project started in January 2004 when a graduate class at the University of Georgia wrote the first version of the book. Subsequent graduate and undergraduate classes at the University of Georgia and elsewhere have improved and extended the book. It has been used as the XML text in a variety of classes, and in each case the class has been required to leave the book in better shape that they received it at the beginning of the term.
Experience with this project and the success of WikiBooks has convinced us that we can further develop the idea of free and open content books to increase the value of these books to students, particularly those who cannot afford paper-based textbooks. We want to add several innovations to improve the quality of the books.
Erik Moeller wrote:
FYI - we need to talk to these people.
Global Text Project
- The goal is to create a free library of 1,000 electronic
textbooks for students in the developing world
For myself, I strongly suspect anything that starts with "students in the developing world" and doesn't acknowledge disadvantaged individuals even in supposedly "first world" countries to be more or less a scam and something to stay away from. If their overall goal is to bring benefits to people in specific countries but also benefit other people in the process, I'm much more likly to support such a general project.
Of course, that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something of a scam as well, on the same grounds. They don't mind selling these laptops to kids in Nairobi, but have a real problem trying to sell the same thing to kids in New Orleans housing projects.
If instead the stated goal was simply "to create a free library of 1,000 electronic textbooks for students" I wouldn't have nearly the problem with what is obviously a group of extra-ordinarily condescending individuals.
BTW, Wikibooks has over 1000 different book titles currently. That is not a goal. That is a fact. While I will admit that effective textbooks that are useful for teaching a class are considerably fewer, this is a group that needs to work with Wikibooks if only to help coordinate and develop content that may be mutually useful, and the Wikibooks project already had a team of volunteers willing to get content developed and actual examples to show for its effort.
I wouldn't even call the XML book to be necessarily the best of Wikibooks either.
On 9/8/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
For myself, I strongly suspect anything that starts with "students in the developing world" and doesn't acknowledge disadvantaged individuals even in supposedly "first world" countries to be more or less a scam and something to stay away from. If their overall goal is to bring benefits to people in specific countries but also benefit other people in the process, I'm much more likly to support such a general project.
Of course, that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something of a scam as well, on the same grounds.
I think that's an unhelpful position. When you start by calling a project "more or less a scam", you will be less likely to change hearts and minds than by simply stating your position clearly (if forcefully). The OLPC folks I know are good people who are likely to listen to constructive suggestions. Also, we're not above making similar mistakes. IMHO, the language in Jimmy's personal appeal for donations, for example, (literally: "I'm doing this for the child in Africa") could have used considerable polish.
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 9/8/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
For myself, I strongly suspect anything that starts with "students in the developing world" and doesn't acknowledge disadvantaged individuals even in supposedly "first world" countries to be more or less a scam and something to stay away from. If their overall goal is to bring benefits to people in specific countries but also benefit other people in the process, I'm much more likly to support such a general project.
Of course, that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something of a scam as well, on the same grounds.
I think that's an unhelpful position. When you start by calling a project "more or less a scam", you will be less likely to change hearts and minds than by simply stating your position clearly (if forcefully). The OLPC folks I know are good people who are likely to listen to constructive suggestions. Also, we're not above making similar mistakes. IMHO, the language in Jimmy's personal appeal for donations, for example, (literally: "I'm doing this for the child in Africa") could have used considerable polish.
It was my personal statement. I meant it. I don't think it needs polish, thank you very much.
--Jimbo
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 9/8/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
For myself, I strongly suspect anything that starts with "students in the developing world" and doesn't acknowledge disadvantaged individuals even in supposedly "first world" countries to be more or less a scam and something to stay away from. If their overall goal is to bring benefits to people in specific countries but also benefit other people in the process, I'm much more likly to support such a general project.
Of course, that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something of a scam as well, on the same grounds.
I think that's an unhelpful position. When you start by calling a project "more or less a scam", you will be less likely to change hearts and minds than by simply stating your position clearly (if forcefully). The OLPC folks I know are good people who are likely to listen to constructive suggestions. Also, we're not above making similar mistakes. IMHO, the language in Jimmy's personal appeal for donations, for example, (literally: "I'm doing this for the child in Africa") could have used considerable polish.
By calling something like this a scam, I am refering to the fact that there seem to be individuals acting supposedly on behalf of underprivileged individuals with their hands out for money, time, and other resources but seem to have a political agenda instead, not any real attempt to do good in the world. Or that the real agenda is not clear and visible, and certainly not the formally stated public purpose.
And more to the point if I see words like I stated above, that some project is for "people in the developing world", I start out automatically suspicious that it is a scam and that such a group must then prove it is something otherwise. That is all I was trying to imply. I have seen far too many of these supposedly good project ideas turn into ways to seperate people from their money than I can count. This is an opinion based on years of experience and seeing even positive fundraising opportunities turn sour and offer far more benefit to the individuals organizing the project than to the supposed targets of the effort.
The real purpose, for example, that the OLPC folks don't want to deal with EU or American states is because the laptop component manufacturer's that are offering price breaks for the OLPC don't want a competing computer product that would undercut their own sales in the USA and EU. If that isn't a political agenda, I don't know what one is. A very significant criticism that I have had about the OLPC is that they are not planning on offering these laptops at Wal-mart (or other 1st world retailers), even for a moderate mark-up in price to help subsidize their distribution to other countries. And the reasons to not offer them for sale in such a manner seem to ring very hallow and are very POV and politically motivated.
I am not denying that there are certainly some varying personal motivations for involvement in worthy projects like the Global Text Project and Wikimedia projects. If one of them happens to be an altruistic belief that adding content to Wikipedia can help my sister-in-law that lives in Accra, Ghana, then so be it. But there are other motivations beyond just working for 3rd world countries, and selling a very cheap encyclopedia to people in Africa.
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
By calling something like this a scam, I am refering to the fact that there seem to be individuals acting supposedly on behalf of underprivileged individuals with their hands out for money, time, and other resources but seem to have a political agenda instead, not any real attempt to do good in the world. Or that the real agenda is not clear and visible, and certainly not the formally stated public purpose.
I am a little unsure why you think this about OLPC in particular. I think they have done amazing work so far, and their motivations seem entirely and completely genuine.
And more to the point if I see words like I stated above, that some project is for "people in the developing world", I start out automatically suspicious that it is a scam and that such a group must then prove it is something otherwise. That is all I was trying to imply. I have seen far too many of these supposedly good project ideas turn into ways to seperate people from their money than I can count.
Yes, I think such caution is always warranted in a general sort of way.
The real purpose, for example, that the OLPC folks don't want to deal with EU or American states is because the laptop component manufacturer's that are offering price breaks for the OLPC don't want a competing computer product that would undercut their own sales in the USA and EU. If that isn't a political agenda, I don't know what one is.
Hmmm.... so, if a manufacturer is willing offer a donation in the form of a price break, so long as the product is sent somewhere else, then the OLPC should just give up and walk away? I don't really understand this perspective.
But there are other motivations beyond just working for 3rd world countries, and selling a very cheap encyclopedia to people in Africa.
Absolutely! One of the great things about free licensing, of course, is that my motivation and your motivation can be totally different and we can still build on each other's work for our own ends.
--Jimbo
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
The real purpose, for example, that the OLPC folks don't want to deal with EU or American states is because the laptop component manufacturer's that are offering price breaks for the OLPC don't want a competing computer product that would undercut their own sales in the USA and EU. If that isn't a political agenda, I don't know what one is.
Hmmm.... so, if a manufacturer is willing offer a donation in the form of a price break, so long as the product is sent somewhere else, then the OLPC should just give up and walk away? I don't really understand this perspective.
We do this all of the time with Wikimedia projects, where good and worthy contributions are turned away due to licensing conflicts. We just turned a substantial body of work away from Wikibooks because we couldn't get copyright clearance due to a non-commercial use only license, to use an example. I could cite other significant examples, but sometimes you need to identify what the goal could be and make sure you havn't made too many compromises early on that would limit your true potential. BTW, I think selecting the GFDL as the target license for Wikipedia was an incredibly fortunate accident by you Jimbo, and something that has ultimately set the tone of all Wikimedia projects.
In the case of the OLPC folks, I think they are limiting themselves and their vision of what could be accomplished, and limiting the potential market of those who might both need and be able to pay for these laptops. They are also significantly restricting their development community, as even software developers who would create content specific for the OLPC won't have access to the equipment unless they obtain them somehow from 3rd world governments directly. I could cite numerous issues that would come up trying to develop software for the OLPC, but having actual working hardware makes the job of a software developer significantly easier. That people are willing to put in effort in spite of these problems is more a testament to the volunteers than the OLPC organizers.
The proposed distribution system for these laptops is something that seems so prone to typical 3rd world graft and corruption that I don't know how realistically these computers can get into the hands of ordinary people of these countries except accidentally. You can't even move a shipping container of wheat or rice to these countries without substantial quantities being diverted away from litterally starving people and into the hands of multi-billionaires who stash all of their money in Switzerland. Why would electronic components be any different?
At least with Wikipedia, Donald Trump has just as much utility to the content that I do.
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
The real purpose, for example, that the OLPC folks don't want to deal with EU or American states is because the laptop component manufacturer's that are offering price breaks for the OLPC don't want a competing computer product that would undercut their own sales in the USA and EU. If that isn't a political agenda, I don't know what one is.
Hmmm.... so, if a manufacturer is willing offer a donation in the form of a price break, so long as the product is sent somewhere else, then the OLPC should just give up and walk away? I don't really understand this perspective.
We do this all of the time with Wikimedia projects, where good and worthy contributions are turned away due to licensing conflicts. We just turned a substantial body of work away from Wikibooks because we couldn't get copyright clearance due to a non-commercial use only license, to use an example. I could cite other significant examples, but sometimes you need to identify what the goal could be and make sure you havn't made too many compromises early on that would limit your true potential. BTW, I think selecting the GFDL as the target license for Wikipedia was an incredibly fortunate accident by you Jimbo, and something that has ultimately set the tone of all Wikimedia projects.
In the case of the OLPC folks, I think they are limiting themselves and their vision of what could be accomplished, and limiting the potential market of those who might both need and be able to pay for these laptops. They are also significantly restricting their development community, as even software developers who would create content specific for the OLPC won't have access to the equipment unless they obtain them somehow from 3rd world governments directly. I could cite numerous issues that would come up trying to develop software for the OLPC, but having actual working hardware makes the job of a software developer significantly easier. That people are willing to put in effort in spite of these problems is more a testament to the volunteers than the OLPC organizers.
The proposed distribution system for these laptops is something that seems so prone to typical 3rd world graft and corruption that I don't know how realistically these computers can get into the hands of ordinary people of these countries except accidentally. You can't even move a shipping container of wheat or rice to these countries without substantial quantities being diverted away from litterally starving people and into the hands of multi-billionaires who stash all of their money in Switzerland. Why would electronic components be any different?
At least with Wikipedia, Donald Trump has just as much utility to the content that I do.
Their proposed system is to address themselves directly to governments. They will apparently not follow any other distribution mean.
This implies that negociation only occurs between olpc team (well, Negroponte I presume) and national government. Once the deal is cut, the entire country is considered. Not specifically poor children, but all children (again, this is what I understood). So, Walmart distribution is unlikely... I would not imagine the US government getting involved in this.
I am actually quite confident all kids will get the computer at some point (quite confident as well as the deal involves some nice financial opportunities - otherwise, sponsors of the project would not be sponsors otherwise - Google, ebay, AMD, Newscap, Brightstarn IADB, Marwell, Nortel, RedHat, 3M, Chi Mei, Quanta, UN, SatelliteTBA... are not only being doing that for the heart...).
However, given the exchanges between borders over there, I just wonder how long it will take for the kid to exchange his own laptop with another kid in the bordering country.
When I was in Algeria, I was always amazed to see what was happening when you gave a pen to a little kid. Within minutes, a group of older children was jumping on him and picking up the pen. And the crying baby was back to us asking for another pen. Which would be stolen a few minutes later. Older kids can then set up a business with kids from the next country.
Best to give the pen to the schoolteacher. Her job to ensure little ones have pens somehow.
This is not only about Africa, this is true in all schools. How many times did my own kids come back telling me someone stole their rubber ? You drop the issue till what is missing is the leather jacket :-)
All the kids in Nigeria will maybe get a laptop, but it is to be expected that kids in nearby countries will find themselves with one very quickly :-)
ant
textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org