On 9/8/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning(a)netzero.net> wrote: 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. -- Peace & Love, Erik

Erik Moeller 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. 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

Jimmy Wales wrote: 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