alt Hacker NewsI'm not sure why people here call it a failure. The children who got a laptop have reached superior skill in using computers, while it seems like not sacrificing any other capability. That seems like a great result, skilled computer use is a highly valuable skill.
Replies
The level of technical aptitude the average westerner has just by proxy of being surrounded by electronics is one of those things like running water that gets taken completely for granted. Even a lifelong ditch digger is going to benefit from learning how to send and receive email, and in 2005 it was not a given that he would have.
The tens of millions per year spent on OLPC could have been better applied to programs that have demonstrated tangible positive impact on human capital development in developing countries, such as free meal programs [0], early childhood developmental screening [1], and other evidence-based policies.
Heck, most policymakers in LDCs panned the program at the time as well not actually prioritizing the aid that was needed [2]
[0] - https://econ.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/Bonds.pdf
[1] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5859813/
[2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20170210165101/http://edition.cn...
A lot of people seem to have thought the progression would be "1. Give computers; 2. ???; 3. Better at everything".
Yes, it was a clear success. It not only did they improve the education of several children and gathered valuable information on how we can try it better next time, they also scared an oligopolistic industry into diversifying their products and supplying several needs that were ignored.
That said, OLPC was extremely ambitious. I don't think they achieved any of the project's objectives. They get a lot of criticism because of that, and it's all ridiculously unfair.