For a paper I have recently written a comment on Negroponte's $100 laptop as strategy for bridging the global digital divide by giving cheap technologies to developing countries. I would like to share these comments, maybe someone wants to comment on them. Best Christian "Nicholas Negroponte and the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) association have introduced the $100 laptop as a strategy for advancing computer technology in developing countries. The problem is that this is a technology that is inferior to Western standards (very slow processor, no hard disk and drives, etc.) and hence can be produced and sold rather cheaply. If the $100 laptop is widely diffused in the Third World, Western actors selling these computers will derive profits, and a global divide in technological progress and standards will emerge that separates advanced Western technology users from users of less-advanced technologies in the Third World. What is needed are not new business strategies, but solutions to the material and social causes of the global digital divide as well as free advanced hardware, infrastructure, and software that are based on open standards and copy-left licenses. That Microsoft and Intel are critical of the $100 laptop doesn't mean that it is automatically a good idea; this is rather a manifestation of the competition for profit and customers in developing countries. Open source technologies have a potential to transcend market logic, what is needed is an advanced $0 laptop with free software for people in developing countries as well as criticism of the logic that has caused the divide between developing and developed countries and solutions to the social, economic, political, and cultural inequalities that underpin the global digital divide". ______________________________ Christian Fuchs Assistant Professor for Internet and Society ICT&S Center - Advanced Studies and Research in Information and Communication Technologies & Society (http://www.icts.uni-salzburg.at) University of Salzburg Sigmund-Haffner-Gasse 18 5020 Salzburg Austria Phone ++43/662/8044 4823 christian.fuchs@sbg.ac.at Information-Society-Technology: http://cartoon.iguw.tuwien.ac.at/christian Managing Editor of tripleC: http://triplec.uti.at -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org]Im Auftrag von J. J. Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. Juni 2006 00:05 An: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Betreff: [Air-l] One Laptop Per Child Here it is: http://www.laptop.org/ Jarek _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

On Jun 6, 2006, at 6:49 PM, Ellis Godard wrote:

Christian Fuchs wrote:

...

If the $100 laptop is widely diffused in the Third World, Western actors selling these computers will derive profits, and a global divide in technological progress and standards will emerge that separates advanced Western technology users from users of less-advanced technologies in the Third World.

How does diffusing technology across a divide which already exists, enhance rather than diminish it? How does giving them computers inhibit their "technological progress", or have any deliterious effect on their technological standards?

One reason this happens is due to the fact.. while the production plan is pretty clear. there are no, and i mean this very clearly, no plans to educate people on how to use this system. i'm sure that eventually someone will come up with something. but... if you are going to design a whole new computer for low-income countries... wouldn't you start with a diffusion and education plan? I would. I've written about this on my blog a while back. My theory is that the majority of these will be destroyed or repurposed in a few years. I look at th ecase and see that it can keep rain off my head, or used as a shovel,or otherwise used effectively to improve a persons life. Jeremy Hunsinger Center for Digital Discourse and Culture () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.aoir.org The Association of Internet Researchers http://www.stswiki.org/ stswiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ LI-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

Jarek wrote:

I think that "giving" cannot be equated with "empowering."

Sure, giving is neither synonymous with nor sufficient for empowerment. But to suggest that because of this program "a global divide...will emerge" (as if it didn't exist now) suggests that giving is DISempowering, which is quite a leap - and, on balance, almost certainly backwards.

Thus "inequality" and "stratification" are by default wrong and harmful in this context.

That doesn't follow at all. The insufficiency of giving does not produce or enhance inequality. And the empirical consequences of giving, whatever they are, are unrelated to a normative evaluation of stratification (or anything else) as "wrong", since facts imply nothing about values. But, to follow your argument anyway: If inequality and stratification are by default wrong, and providing hardware somehow increases inequality, is the solution to maintain (even extend) differences in hardware access? -eg

Thanks to all of those who have commented and started discussion. I have again thought about some of the points of discussion and tried to find my own answers to the questions at hand that I'd like to share. WHY CAN THE PRACTICE OF GIVING $100 LAPTOPS TO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES HAVE STRATIFYING EFFECTS AND CREATE INEQUALITY OR DEEPEN OLD INEQUALITIES? The $100 laptop is technologically old-fashioned, e.g. its clock frequency is only 500 MHz. The global digital divide is about an unequal access to material infrastructure, skills, usage capacities, and benefits concerning ICTs on a global level. This problem today starts with the fact that most people in developing countries don't have access to telephones, computers, the internet, etc. Assume that $100 laptops will be spread throughout developing countries. What could be possible effects? As these laptops are technologically inferior to Western technology, a new divide between owners of advanced and ever-progressive technology and owners of old-fashioned technology will emerge. The emerging divide then is not about have and have-nots, but about those who have advanced technology and those who have inferior technology. Not technology creates inequality, but "technology transfer" is embedded into unequal social structures that need to be changed at the same time that ICTs are adopted in developing countries. Who will be able to buy such a laptop of the social structures causing the global wealth divide are not changed at the same time that technologies for developing countries are advanced? It's not a technological, but a social issue. WHAT IS INEQUALITY AND STRATIFICATION IN THIS CONTEXT? WHAT IS THE UNDERLYING LOGIC? I like to think of these terms in the categories of Bourdieu: Modern society is based on the asymmetric accumulation of economic, political, and cultural capital and hence creates different classes and class fractions which control certain amounts of the different capital types. Modern society is not functionally differentiated (Luhmann), but stratified (i.e. different strata/classes are created that have different degrees of power) because it is based on different classes controlling different amounts of different capital types. That this means inequality is a moral judgement, it means unequal opportunities for participating in society. The underlying logic is the logic of accumulation characteristic for modern society. ICTs are today embedded into stratified structures, they are an economic resource that can't be accessed by all; and cultural capital needed for operating them and the institutional capital needed for using them in empowering ways are also not accessible to all. Technologies for the Third World need in my view be connected to a global redistribution of the different types of capital, this is not a technical issue, Negroponte and his initiative seem to believe that the digital divide can be solved technologically. The $100 laptop also doesn't take political and cultural capital that is connected to ICTs and needed for their meaningful operation into consideration. I think that stratification and inequality are appropriate terms in this case, because these are terms describing the dominant logic of modern society. I like that Jan van Dijk in context of the digital divide speaks of underlying "structural inequalities". DO PEOPLE IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES NEED ICTs? People in developing countries have the same human rights as people in the West. They have a right for food, social security, etc., and also for means of communication and the accompanying skills. To provide developing countries with inferior technology conveys the image that they are considered as second-class citizens who are only in need of second-class technology. I think that technologies for developing countries should not create dependency on Western standards that must be purchased because this would reproduce the old mechanisms of colonial and post-colonial dependency and value-transfer. Therefore I think that technologies for developing countries should be adapted to local needs, autonomos from dominant Western standards and economic interests, based on open source technology, and be distributed at absolutely no cost. I think the last point is crucial because today there are 3 billion people living on less than $2 per day. How should they be able to purchase a $100 laptop? Selling these laptops in the end will mainly create profits. What is needed is global redistribution and an advanced $0 laptop as expression of an emerging open source gift economy that quetions the dominant mechanisms of exclusion, dependency, and value transfer that has characterized the colonial and post-colonial global economy. Best, Christian

Several of the posts in this thread discuss the difference between giving and empowering--empowering through technological fluency as Jocelyn mentioned in her post. Medical and human rights teams travel the globe; do we need technology teams? Do we have them? Pam Pamela Estes Brewer Lecturer -- Coordinator, Professional Writing Department of English and Philosophy Murray State University PhD Student in Technical Communication & Rhetoric, Texas Tech University 270-809-4719 fax 270-809-4545 pam.brewer@murraystate.edu On March 1, 2006, Murray State University will begin moving all its phone numbers in the 762 exchange to an 809 exchange. My new numbers will be 270-809-4719 (office), and 270-809-4545 (FAX). -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Christian Fuchs Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 5:22 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] One Laptop Per Child For a paper I have recently written a comment on Negroponte's $100 laptop as strategy for bridging the global digital divide by giving cheap technologies to developing countries. I would like to share these comments, maybe someone wants to comment on them. Best Christian "Nicholas Negroponte and the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) association have introduced the $100 laptop as a strategy for advancing computer technology in developing countries. The problem is that this is a technology that is inferior to Western standards (very slow processor, no hard disk and drives, etc.) and hence can be produced and sold rather cheaply. If the $100 laptop is widely diffused in the Third World, Western actors selling these computers will derive profits, and a global divide in technological progress and standards will emerge that separates advanced Western technology users from users of less-advanced technologies in the Third World. What is needed are not new business strategies, but solutions to the material and social causes of the global digital divide as well as free advanced hardware, infrastructure, and software that are based on open standards and copy-left licenses. That Microsoft and Intel are critical of the $100 laptop doesn't mean that it is automatically a good idea; this is rather a manifestation of the competition for profit and customers in developing countries. Open source technologies have a potential to transcend market logic, what is needed is an advanced $0 laptop with free software for people in developing countries as well as criticism of the logic that has caused the divide between developing and developed countries and solutions to the social, economic, political, and cultural inequalities that underpin the global digital divide". ______________________________ Christian Fuchs Assistant Professor for Internet and Society ICT&S Center - Advanced Studies and Research in Information and Communication Technologies & Society (http://www.icts.uni-salzburg.at) University of Salzburg Sigmund-Haffner-Gasse 18 5020 Salzburg Austria Phone ++43/662/8044 4823 christian.fuchs@sbg.ac.at Information-Society-Technology: http://cartoon.iguw.tuwien.ac.at/christian Managing Editor of tripleC: http://triplec.uti.at -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org]Im Auftrag von J. J. Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. Juni 2006 00:05 An: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Betreff: [Air-l] One Laptop Per Child Here it is: http://www.laptop.org/ Jarek _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

Hi everyone, I've been following this discussion and also have a few comments. I'm going to quote from various comments, just to raise some points of clarification. The issue of technology has been raised a lot in the previous e-mails. So here's my question: for word processing, Internet, and basic educational tools, do you actually need a high end laptop? No. Why spend $1000 on laptops or desktop computers when you can build a cheaper model that gets the job done, and offer it at a lower price? "Apparently when Linux was used in Africa... vast amount of time configuring and learning to use the systems was required so users gave up and went to windows." I run an organization (http://www.fiveminutestomidnight.org) and we have Linux projects in Africa. The difference between the $100 laptop and Linux is that the $100 laptop isn't meant to be upgraded or have new software installed... Thus, you just got rid of most of the complex technical issues related to running Linux. Running OpenOffice or FireFox in Linux is easy. "While the production plan is pretty clear. there are no, and i mean this very clearly, no plans to educate people on how to use this system." This is why children are being targeted. If you listen to Negroponte's MIT speech (http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/313/), he addresses this directly. Also, if you visit developing nations that have cyber cafes (any city, really), you'll notice that a large portion of the youth already know how to use instant messengers, e-mail, and basic office tools. The idea of targeting children is that they can experiment and do more independent learning. Sure, this misses people at the lowest level of the socioeconomic ladder, who've never used computers and who don't have the ability to attend school, but you have to start somewhere. "My theory is that the majority of these will be destroyed or repurposed in a few years. I look at the case and see that it can keep rain off my head, or used as a shovel,or otherwise used effectively to improve a persons life."

From laptop pilots in the past (including Negroponte's), it's been shown that such laptops are beneficial because households can use them to have light during the night, when electricity is out. People have been doing this, and it makes the entire family value the laptop (and its functioning state :) ). One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) has no problem with such alternative uses, from what I've heard.

Thanks, Wojciech -- Five Minutes to Midnight: Youth on human rights and current affairs http://www.fiveminutestomidnight.org/