[OLPC Security] Grey Markets: differentiation of legitimately purchased laptops

[Mike C. Fletcher]

travis anderson-bond wrote:
>> Sadly, in some deployment situations, that's overwhelmingly likely in my
>> opinion. If the choice has to be made
>>   between near starvation, and having a glitzy educational tool, it's
>> very likely that satisfying the immediate, basic
>>   need will come first.
>>     
>
> Without getting **too** off-topic:  At least the OLPC project is
> making the world better, one component at a time.  Ending world hunger
> and poverty is, sadly, outside the mandate.
>   
Regarding the hierarchy of needs assertion:

    Laslow's hierarchy of needs is a good rule of thumb, but it is not
    absolute. If we really are handing a machine to a starving child,
    we've got a problem, but as far as I'm aware, we are not doing so in
    any country yet.  That is, we are primarily working in countries
    where there is already food, water (of some description, though
    potentially scarce or polluted), and shelter (of some sort). [1]

    The laptops are being purchased by countries which "have it
    together" enough to be be planning major infrastructure deployments
    for educational initiatives.  In the areas where we are going,
    education is the "next level" in the hierarchy.  These are not 
    *rich* people, so there needs to be disincentives to sell off the
    laptop in order to get immediate cash (people discount the value of
    long-term gain in comparison to short-term gain, so will often trade
    against their best interests), but they are not generally starving
    either.

    There is an argument that says you should never help anyone achieve
    level N if there is anyone, anywhere, who has not achieved level
    N-1, but from a practical standpoint, that would leave everyone at
    level N-1 for a very long time.  There are hundreds of groups
    world-wide working on the problem of starvation, malaria, and the
    like.  Level N-1 is being addressed (though it obviously can always
    use more effort), and those who would like to focus their efforts
    there certainly can.

    Education (level N), however, is a key requirement for any society
    to be able to weather changes in the environment, political climate
    and the like.  For long-term survivability, the populace needs to be
    educated and aware, and if they do not address those level N issues,
    they will tend to fall back to level N-1 crises.  People in the
    developing world get that.  At least a noticeable proportion of the
    population see the long-term benefits and are willing to sacrifice
    to provide educational opportunities to their children.  We need to
    make sure that they are not overwhelmed by those who over-value the
    potential short-term benefit in misappropriation in comparison.

Focusing back on the issue at hand:

    We are looking at ways to provide a disincentive to grey-market
    sales so that the perceived short-term value is reduced, in order to
    allow the real long-term value to seem comparatively more valuable. 
    The suggestion on the table is to alter the colour-specification
    file during production of the G1G1 laptop runs so that they all have
    a single distinctive xo-logo colour (white).  The regular run's
    colour-specification file would then *not* include that colour
    combination.

Take care,
Mike

[1] And it should be noted that along with the educational programs 
focussed on core operations, we have programs which are providing 
practical advice to the children (and their families) on how to address 
concerns such as water purification, sanitation, irrigation and the 
like.  Educational allows individuals with even minimal resources to 
improve their lives via effort.

-- 
________________________________________________
  Mike C. Fletcher
  Designer, VR Plumber, Coder
  http://www.vrplumber.com
  http://blog.vrplumber.com