[Its.an.education.project] Ivan's latest blog entry on OLPC

Wed May 14 23:12:56 CEST 2008

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Pamela Jones <pj2 at groklaw.net> wrote:

> With all due respect, Ivan, which I genuinely feel, I felt when you calm
> down, you'll see that there are some logic issues.
>
> Also some strategy ones.
>
> Logic:
>
> You attack Stallman for being such a purist about openness and freedom of
> the code. But at the end, you say essentially the same thing, that Microsoft
> stuff isn't really appropriate as far as the goals of OLPC are concerned.
>
> And you are right. They are not.  But you spend a lot of time attacking
> that very concept first, before ending up saying that it does matter after
> all.
>
> Now, I'm not a purist, so I genuinely don't care ultimately if all the kids
> get a Windows laptop, as long as it isn't rigged to prevent installing Linux
> instead.  It would slow down their progress, but it won't stop them.  I'd
> prefer Sugar, or any GNU/Linux that can work on it,  because I have an XO,
> and I love using it, and I find it creative and intriguingly fascinating.
>
> Teachers may only want something that "just works" but kids will want a lot
> more than that.
>
> Let me explain how I know that. I look at my own experience with computers.
> When I first started, I was in Windows 95 and I simply hated computers.  The
> relative trying to teach me almost gave up on me, because of my attitude.
>  But once I discovered the Internet, I fell in love with computers, because
> it got me *there*.  So at that point, it would be true that all I wanted was
> something that got me there reliably.
>
> But I was working in a small law office, and no one had a clue about
> computers, and yet the boss wanted to be on the Internet for email. So I got
> anointed to figure it out for all of us.  That introduced me to security and
> web design and fixing broken hardware and eventually to Knoppix and Red Hat.
>  Despite knowing nothing, I found it really, really interesting.  And I
> started to learn about security on Windows as compared to Linux.
>
> As I used Knoppix to diagnose problems (yay Emacs!), I fell in love with
> software at last and that led me to Linux.  Who knew? I had no background in
> anything remotely like this, but I found it fun to fix Windows 98SE
> computers when they got infected with malware, which Windows 98 can't avoid,
> no matter what you do, I finally concluded. That was a turning point. I was
> no expert, but I figured out for myself eventually that there was no way to
> be secure in Windows 98.  An expert later told me I was right, but the point
> is, Knoppix made it possible for me to know it by myself.  That is huge.
>
> It was how I switched to Linux.  But it wasn't a fast transfer, and there
> are Mac Powerbooks in between as well.  I love my Powerbook. I use it for
> power use on email and such, and it's fine. But it's not the same as Linux,
> not by a mile.  Why not? Because ultimately you are not in control.  I
> assume programmers can figure out how to escape certain Apple-driven
> decisions, but I don't have time since Groklaw to learn anything new, so I
> can't. It bothers me *deeply* that you can't turn off Bonjour, for example.
>  I figured out how to turn off widgets and spotlight, but Apple won't help
> you.  If anyone knows how to turn off Bonjour, please email me, by the way.
>  I don't wish to be broadcasting my whereabouts to the world all the time,
> even if I turn off all file sharing capacities.
>

Should I assume you have the presence service and sharing disabled on your
XO (or would, if you don't have one?)

So, I'm saying all this to say that falling in love with computers is an
> unpredictable gift. We don't know which kids will do it, but we know some
> will, if you let them. I don't think it can happen unless you can look at
> the workings *and control them*.   I couldn't do it until I could look at
> the workings behind the screen, which Microsoft tries to mask from view, and
> Apple tries to control no matter what you can see, and could change it to
> suit myself.  On Linux, you are free to be yourself and to decide what you
> want to do, how much you wish to learn, and nothing, nothing, nothing blocks
> you but your own interest and time.
>
> And no one spies on you, or reports on you, or facilitates you being taken
> over.  It's a significant difference, and it's a difference that I think
> matters when children are in the picture. I never relax on any computer
> unless it's a GNU/Linux computer. I'd never let any child of mine use
> Windows.  This security issue dovetails with *any* educational goal,  and
> even more so for little children.  I don't know if you read the Craig Mundie
> interview where he suggest a wonderful solution for education is MultiPoint,
> their solution whereby multiple mice can use one computer, with a picture of
> it on the wall, but I find it scary.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a137998b-e8d6-4fff-b805-2798d2c6e41d&displaylang=en
>
> It's .Net stuff, and when I read the description, I cringe. The multiple
> mice idea is nice, actually, and I've always wanted to be able to share a
> computer that way, but Microsoft's stuff is so utterly controlled, so
> utterly unsafe, I  don't see it as appropriate for an educational
> environment, unless you have no other choice in the world.  The idea is
> fine, but the implementation is scary. Of course, that is often the case
> with Microsoft. How can anyone in good conscience say that children should
> use Microsoft software, when even adults can't control their own computers
> when they run it?
>
> Microsoft also stuff tracks your moves in a way that I don't accept for
> myself any more, let alone a child.
>
> So while I know you can start on a Windows computer and still end up
> learning something, I also know it's like you keep bumping into that wall,
> the screen that tries to hide whatever is behind it.  It's a conceptual
> difference that is fundamental to Windows and any proprietary software.  I
> think if OLPC switches to XP lite or whatever, it will end up the largest
> botnet in the world.  How could it not?
>

I think the two things getting mixed up here are learning in general, and
learning about computers.  If you're learning basic maths with the help of a
computer program like Number Munchers, how does being able to look at the
code help you learn math?  Its even more true for learning grammar with Word
Munchers.  In these cases (and other use cases for activities on the XO),
you're trying to teach the fundamentals of particular subjects, and
personally I don't see how open or closed source software designed the same
way would change the amount or the rate at which they learn those subjects.

Now if you can't even open Word Munchers because your Apple IIe is infected
with malware thats a different story...  But here too I tend to agree with
Ivan - if you're arguement is that Linux is better becuase you don't have to
deal with spyware and malware, I think a lot of that is due to differences
in security models, not necessarily open vs closed source.

So, to glom on to what rms wrote, in his usual style, without grasping the
> essential truth that openness matches education is to lose an essential
> aspect of what makes the XO so extraordinary.
>
> Now, as to the strategy part:  I think it's a mistake to trash OLPC, even
> now.  Yes, leave, yes, do something better, yes point out issues, but
> trashing isn't helpful. I honor the fact that the guy is trying to fulfill a
> vision that isn't utterly selfish. How many people are there in the world
> who would even try?  He's trying to reach and help children no one else in
> the world is interested in at all. Not Intel. Not Microsoft. No one with a
> profit motive cares about those kids in remote villages in Peru, etc. But I
> care about those childen. I care deeply. And so do you. And so does he. How
> to care may vary, but the goal is still the right one.   And yes, any laptop
> is better than no laptop, so long as it can go on the Internet or at least
> mesh with other kids in the village.  But a laptop that is itself a learning
> instrument, that is a truly wonderful gift, and I hope Sugar stays. There is
> a learning difference when software is open and free.
>
> Yes, he isn't technically savvy.  That is obvious. Yes, that makes it hard
> for him to make wise decisions.  Some of the things he's said are offensive.
> But when people get mad, that happens.
>
> So, I think you did damage to those children by airing your personal views,
> which are  probably quite accurate as to the facts but that I don't think
> the world needed to know in such detail.
>
> I also couldn't link to it, due to language, and so I hope you redo the
> effort, dial back on the animus, the personality stuff, and focus a bit more
> on what will help *now*.
>
> PJ
>
> Ivan Krstić wrote:
>
>> On May 13, 2008, at 9:46 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>
>>> Just make sure you read all the way through before trying to
>>> understand it. I needed to read it through twice as he is a very angry
>>> person and his anger seems to go at a lot of targets..
>>>
>>
>> Do you feel that particular points were not properly supported or
>> explained in the essay?
>>
>> --
>> Ivan Krstić <krstic at solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu> | http://radian.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Its.an.education.project mailing list
>> Its.an.education.project at tema.lo-res.org
>> http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Its.an.education.project mailing list
> Its.an.education.project at tema.lo-res.org
> http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lo-res.org/pipermail/its.an.education.project/attachments/20080514/c8e21d60/attachment.html>