[OLPC-SF] Microsoft Is Joining Low-Cost Laptop Project - New York Times

[jim]

   It's "massage", not "message" (per marshall 
mcluhan, penguin books, 1967). 
   Reading a paper book is certainly a different 
experience from reading via the internet; the 
differences may be subliminal but are real. 

   My point is that there's an educational 
aspect that underlies the delivery platform. 
The message of open source is clear and 
important: collaborate, expand opportunities. 
With an open source platform, it's easy to 
expand and innovate. There's a similar, open-
source-y underpinning to the creative commons 
approach to content, too. Open is good, silo 
is bad. We should teach morality. 
   Pippy encourages not only analytical thought 
but creativity, too. I cannot guess what kids 
might dream up and implement in Python using 
Sugar as a framework. Extending the games and 
other activity code would be a likely first 
step, and interesting to witness. 
   Here's a creative app^H^H^Hactivity: 
http://superhappydevhouse.org/XO+Flashlight 

   The "message" of Windows seems inescapably 
"business as usual" per sanctioned authority, 
and stay within your assigned box or pay extra 
money for a longer leash. 
   Practically, what does it cost to buy Visual 
Studio? 
   And who in the windows world extended 
Solitaire or the Windows desktop? 

   I, too, would like to know what people 
think as to the educational role of open 
source in this case (XO with a future prospect 
of a windows variant). If Windows ships on 
this innovative green laptop, how does that 
contribute to improving education? I claim 
that it holds things back, and enough so that 
it shouldn't happen. 


On Sat, 2008-05-17 at 22:13 -0700, Sameer Verma wrote:
> jim wrote:
> > thank you, ed. 
> >
> >    it might help that someone remind mr 
> > negroponte that the medium is the massage. 
> > in other words, part of one's education 
> > comes from the values of the channel that 
> > deliver the educational content. 
> >   
> 
> I think mixing the medium and the message is myopic. Does reading a
> paper-based book intrigue people to learn about making paper and learn
> about book-binding? Does watching TV intrigue people about how TVs
> work?  Net neutrality fights this very idea, stating that the medium
> should not interfere with the message. Yes, the medium in this case can
> also be a part of the message for computing-related topics, but what
> about topics that aren't even remotely related to computers...such as
> purification of water? Yes, perhaps Pippy can help one think
> analytically, but beyond that, how does that help with learning about
> water purification?
> 
> I am playing devil's advocate, but I'd like to hear more from people
> about mixing the message with the medium.
> 
> PS: Jim, I hope the usage of "massage" in your post was a typo.
> Otherwise I am way off track and off topic ;-)
> 
> Sameer
>