[Grassroots-l] Grassroots Digest, Vol 10, Issue 12

[George Pope]

Does Microsoft really want to help poor and under funded students? Or do 
they simply want to hock students, institutions on MS Windows?

If Gates Foundation agrees to fund XOs as a matter of charity in 
*million dollar increments* in the amount of the difference between 
original target price of $100/unit and the cost that Birmingham, Alabama 
is paying for 15,000 XOs ($3 million) plus $10 Widows and SD card). Thus 
each million dollar subsidy would put 9090 units into students hands at 
an institutional cost of $100/XO. Further this commitment should apply 
retroactively to standing and completed XO orders.

Otherwise Microsoft's participation reminds me of what we as parents 
used to go through skiing with our children. When my children were about 
6-9 years old we bought them small but high performance skis at about a 
75% discount. Thus we were all hooked for life because of course my 
children grew taller and had to have longer skis.

I'd also stipulate that *Gates Foundation participation shall remain a 
purely charitable one "and shall never become subject the imposition of 
any Microsoft software licensing restrictions*."

george pope


grassroots-request at lists.laptop.org wrote:
> Send Grassroots mailing list submissions to
> 	grassroots at lists.laptop.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/grassroots
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	grassroots-request at lists.laptop.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	grassroots-owner at lists.laptop.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Grassroots digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [sugar] Microsoft (Edward Cherlin)
>    2. Re: Access to A One Laptop Per Child "XO" machine in	low
>       income areas of the US. (Edward Cherlin)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 13:23:14 -0700
> From: "Edward Cherlin" <echerlin at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Grassroots-l] [sugar] Microsoft
> To: "Sameer Verma" <sverma at sfsu.edu>
> Cc: OLPC Grassroots <grassroots at lists.laptop.org>,	OLPC-Open
> 	<Olpc-open at laptop.org>, sugar at laptop.org,	Nicholas Negroponte
> 	<nn at media.mit.edu>,	its.an.education.project at tema.lo-res.org,
> 	devel at laptop.org,	support-gang at laptop.org
> Message-ID:
> 	<e574f6eb0805161323q7f4f121kd17f25dcd59b9da4 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>   
>> Morgan Collett wrote:
>>     
>>> 2008/5/16 Nicholas Negroponte <nn at media.mit.edu>: (word document attached)
>>>
>>> For those who can't or won't open the word document, it contains simply this:
>>>
>>> Mission statement of OLPC
>>>
>>> To eliminate poverty and create world peace by providing education to
>>> the poorest and most remote children on the planet by making them more
>>> active in their own learning, through collaborative and creative
>>> activities, connected to the Internet, with their own laptop, as a
>>> human right and cost free to them.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Devel mailing list
>>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>>       
>
> The phrase "making them more active in their own learning, through
> collaborative and creative activities" appears to be code for
> "Constructionism". Or maybe weasel-wording.
>
>   
>> Its nothing like what I see at http://laptop.org/vision/mission/
>>
>> Sameer
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
>> Associate Professor of Information Systems
>> San Francisco State University
>> San Francisco CA 94132 USA
>> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>> http://opensource.sfsu.edu/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>     
>
> Quite right.
>
> http://www.olpcnews.com/people/negroponte/new_olpc_mission_statement.html
>
> Another New OLPC Mission Statement?!
> Posted on May 16, 2008 by Wayan Vota in People: Negroponte
>
> In the midst of the latest Windows on the XO controversy, Nicholas
> Negroponte seems to have announced a third new mission statement for
> One Laptop Per Child. From his email to the OLPC Sugar list serve he
> says that the OLPC mission hasn't changed in three years, and then
> points to this statement:
> olpc mission
>
>     To eliminate poverty and create world peace by providing education
> to the poorest and most remote children on the planet by making them
> more active in their own learning, through collaborative and creative
> activities, connected to the Internet, with their own laptop, as a
> human right and cost free to them.
>
> Now unless I just came down with Negropontism, the current OLPC
> mission statement on Laptop.org doesn't look anything like that.
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't see any mention of free
> laptops and Internet access as basic human right when I read:
>
>     OLPC is not, at heart, a technology program, nor is the XO a
> product in any conventional sense of the word. OLPC is a non-profit
> organization providing a means to an end?an end that sees children in
> even the most remote regions of the globe being given the opportunity
> to tap into their own potential, to be exposed to a whole world of
> ideas, and to contribute to a more productive and saner world
> community.
>
> Let's also not forget that the current OLPC mission, whichever one it
> is, was not the first mission espoused by One Laptop Per Child. The
> orginal OLPC mission was much more revolutionary, and to use a word
> from Walter Bender, prescriptive:
>
>     OLPC is not at heart a technology program and the XO is not a
> product in any conventional sense of the word. We are non-profit:
> constructionism is our goal; XO is our means of getting there. It is a
> very cool, even revolutionary machine, and we are very proud of it.
> But we would also be delighted if someone built something better, and
> at a lower price.
>
> I wonder, does Windows XO count as better?
>
>
>
>
>