Designers on quest to build $12 computer (based on NES)

[II2II]

People seem to think it's easy going into a poor country that has nothing and turning into a new high tech state. It took hundreds of years for Western nations to reach that point of societal evolution, so what makes you think you can force it to happen overnight just by bringing in technology from outside? If anything, forcing technology on countries that are not ready for it is detrimental because now they suddenly have to build an energy infrastructure that they didn't need before to support it and they have to import fuel to sustain it, but where is the money coming from when they can't even feed themselves? They need self sufficiency first, then they need a strong export base to get hard cash rolling in, and THEN you can worry about teaching them more advanced skills. Teaching them about technology when they don't even have enough viable farms or clean water to sustain their population is putting the cart before the horse.

There are a few problems with your assumptions.

1. Developing nations are at various stages of development. Some of these nations may have a reliable food supply, effective public health system, and ample resources to supply their own economy. What they lack are the skilled labor to maintain all of that.

2. Computers can teach more than computer skills. People are seriously considering using computers as glorified books because they cost less. The notion of ebooks in the west is notoriously expensive because we treat them as novelty items rather than as tools, and as a means of controlling distribution rather than freeing distribution. Different design decisions would reduce the cost.

3. The energy infrastructure may already be there. Yes, it is true that our computers are gluttonous energy hogs. But that is a design decision that values performance over efficiency. There are entire computers that use about 10 W of power (including display), and you can probably drive that energy use even lower. That means that a computer could probably use less energy than the televisions that already populate these nations.

4. There is no such thing as self-sufficiency and long term stability. Large systems have smaller statistical fluctuations. In order to be a member of that larger system, you have to have a diverse enough economy to be a full participant. Take food. You can become self-sufficient by growing enough food to feed the population, but that does nothing to buffer yourself from a localized drought. You can develop better methods of preserving food, but that will not buffer you from a long term drought or intensive agriculture that has depleted the land.

5. Modern computers are communications tools. Why do you think that people who live in abject poverty have access to a radio, a TV, a cell phone, or even internet cafes? There are a multitude of reasons, but one reason is to have a communications tool. Cell phones are important for setting up business deals. Television and radio is important for getting timely news from the outside world. (Prior to the invention of the telegraph, news would often take days or weeks to jump from industrialized nations like France to Britain.

6. The lack of economic or technological development frequently has nothing to do with being prepared for it. Many nations had strong economies and solid education systems before they deteriorated due to war. Many of the people who suffer from the lack of education and economic development aren't even the barbarians that perpetrated the war, but stuck in the turbulence of war. They need tools to help them fight back without bloodshed.

 

[Unknown_K]

The problem with most developing nations is that the previous government ran up huge debts (most african nations) leaving the people to sell resources to try and keep up with the payments leaving them little to expand the economy (and the world bank likes it that way). I notice that the world bank has a tendency to forgive loans to industrial nations, but not 3rd world ones.

 

[Quadraman]

The problem with most developing nations is that the previous government ran up huge debts (most african nations) leaving the people to sell resources to try and keep up with the payments leaving them little to expand the economy (and the world bank likes it that way). I notice that the world bank has a tendency to forgive loans to industrial nations, but not 3rd world ones.

That's because they don't want underdeveloped nations to start exploiting their own resources and providing for themselves. They want to keep them enslaved to the wealthier nations. Colonialism doesn't fly in todays world so they do the next best (or is it worst?) thing and make debt slaves out of the developing world so they can never rise up to challenge the industrial might of the westernized world. This is why all these charitable projects to bring underdeveloped nations into the modern age are doomed to failure. The powers that be will never allow them to succeed.

 

[paws]

You're an idiot

QFT

 

[Quadraman]

You're an idiot

And you have a typical westerners attitude that you can solve everyone else's problems simply by raising their technology level. Is it any wonder everyone hates us?

 

[paws]

You're an idiot

And you have a typical westerners attitude that you can solve everyone else's problems simply by raising their technology level. Is it any wonder everyone hates us?

No, that's not it. Bunsen's pointing out that you have no idea what those problems are.

 

[Quadraman]

You're an idiot

And you have a typical westerners attitude that you can solve everyone else's problems simply by raising their technology level. Is it any wonder everyone hates us?

No, that's not it. Bunsen's pointing out that you have no idea what those problems are.

I am well aware of the problems that exist in this world. Every country has to deal with them at some point in their history. What I am trying to point out, that you keep missing, is that for one reason or other many countries simply aren't ready to transition to a tech based economy. Maybe feeding people isn't a problem for all countries, but most suffer from some gap in their infrastructure that prevents them from utilizing high technology. How do you expect people to afford to buy these things when their incomes are so low? Even skilled labor doesn't get paid much in most countries. Then, once they own a piece of technology, how do they afford to maintain it? Energy isn't free. Power plants cost money to build and fuel also costs money. A country with a small economy often can't afford to make the transition without going into crippling debt. That is the problem Africa faces. They want to modernize and exploit their own resources but they can't because they are in debt to the world bank and western countries provide them with foreign aid that would be cut off as soon as they start trying to support themselves. There are no more empires, but the poor countries are still being exploited by the rich ones just the same only instead of conquering them, we force them into debts they can never repay by telling them they need to upgrade their technology and loaning them the money to do it. The third world needs to be left to develop at it's own pace, whether that be fast or slow, and be allowed to do so from the exploitation of their own resources and not by going into debt.

 

[II2II]

Since exporting our old computers to developing nations was mentioned, here's a video that someone put together to explain a bit about how it works:

 

[chris]

Sidestepping the issue that Quadraman and Bunsen are so angry about (for the record, I'm with Bunsen, but I'll say no more but that)

If Contiki gets ported to that, I am getting one even if I have to get it shipped from India, assuming of course it has a modem/ethernet/some communications port, which is a reasonable assumption considering it's said to be able to connect to the net.

 

[Unknown_K]

I think working computers should be exported and used (something not 100% obsolete either).

Still someday down the road everything will fail, what is africa going to do with all the monitors then?

Something tells me 200 years from now companies will be mining the landfills in africa looking for the stuff nobody wants now.

 

[porter]

Still someday down the road everything will fail, what is africa going to do with all the monitors then?

Are these the monitors that are immune from failing?

I'm sure some bright spark :b&w: will work out how to turn an old monitor into a micro-wave oven.

What happens if Africa doesn't like what the Joneses have?

 

[II2II]

Well, the video in question suggests that about 20% of the equipment that the receive doesn't work, and that they try to fix it. If they cannot fix it, then it ends up as landfill. They don't have recycling facilities.

Here's a story from the BBC on the topic: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7544003.stm

It also sounds like importing the computers is out of the businesses pockets, and people decide to buy this stuff from the business themselves. If they don't want it, they won't import it.

Given our tendency to dump stuff that is over 5 years old, I doubt that they will see much equipment that is over 10 years old. Given the right software, you can do pretty much anything we do today on a 10 year old machine.

You know, I'm thinking of how much less waste there would be if we simply upgraded wisely. Swapping mainboards and hard drives instead of replacing the entire enclosure. It would probably reduce the cost of shipping stuff to developing nations too (alas, components would be harder to test in this fragmentary state).

 

[porter]

You know, I'm thinking of how much less waste there would be if we simply upgraded wisely. Swapping mainboards and hard drives instead of replacing the entire enclosure.

Government Economists would have a fit! You would lower GDP in an instant! Shame on you for considering such a thing!

 

[MacJunky]

You know, I'm thinking of how much less waste there would be if we simply upgraded wisely. Swapping mainboards and hard drives instead of replacing the entire enclosure. It would probably reduce the cost of shipping stuff to developing nations too (alas, components would be harder to test in this fragmentary state).

If it makes you feel any better, I have been using the same ATX full tower case as my primary desktop case since 2005 and it is currently housing it's 5th motherboard. It would seem that I *might* be on the verge of a 6th and the number is really only that high because I started out with a Rev 1 B&W -> Rev 2 B&W -> Sawtooth -> Digital Audio -> Asus P5K. Next board might be a Gigabyte GA-P45-DS3R in the next few months unless I wait it out for Nehalem prices to get low enough and Apple to support it.Been using the same Antec Neopower 650 Blue since near the end of my Sawtooth board's usage as well and I hope to keep using it for some time to come.

 

[II2II]

Government Economists would have a fit! You would lower GDP in an instant! Shame on you for considering such a thing!

There are two problems with economists:

- Most of them do not know how to do math, nor want to, which sucks when they're in a profession that is about the numbers.

- Virtually all of them are indoctrinated with the same economic theories as a part of their training. So economics pretty much ends up as one big group thing.

 

[Bunsen]

And still you fail to understand.

I understand you perfectly. It's just that you're talking complete horse-puckey, and you're too dim, stubborn or arrogant to notice, even when it's been patiently explained to you half a dozen times.

Your point of view (on both the world, and what anybody else here is saying) is so far disconnected from reality that it would have to work its way up to being merely wrong. Calling it wrong is an insult to wrong things.

You say that typing skills alone can make a big difference

Your failure to notice the difference between something I claim, and a quote from one of the team members, someone who has actually been to India, goes some way to explaining your failure to differentiate between a button marked "Quote" and one marked "Reply", or what that key in the top right of your keyboard marked "Del" is for. If you're going to paste my entire post into yours, perhaps you should consider reading it first.

I hear community colleges have excellent courses in adult remedial reading comprehension these days. Perhaps you should consider one. If that's too challenging, consider watching more Discovery Channel and less Fox News. Alternatively, consider putting down the bong, moving out of your mother's basement and seeing the world beyond Podunk, Iowa*, or wherever it is that you skulk. Don't worry, you won't be eaten by cannibals.

India and China are the two fastest growing boom economies in the world. If I was you, I'd be more worried about my own children's future than theirs.

You are the reason the world hates America.

* No collateral offense to indigenous Iowans is intended

 

[Unknown_K]

From somebody who visited one large city in a country you seem to know everything about it Bunsen. Both India and China have a huge percentage of people without a pot to piss in, just like there are areas in the US that were dirt poor even when the country had 50 years of booming economy.

My neighbors son whos wife came from India and has family there tells me it takes 2-3 days by bus from the closest airport to get to her small town. That doesn't sound too high tech to me.

There has been always a rich section of India and China, during the latest booms there is emerging a nice middle class, but those 2 huge countries still have some of the poorest people on the planet that number in the 100's of millions.

 

[chris]

*Ahem*

Those people that you say have no pots to piss in are not the target market. Have fun with your straw man, though.

*deep breath*

Why does a discussion of a cool piece of hardware always have to turn into a debate with both sides mudslinging? Maybe there are people it'll benefit, maybe not. It isn't a crime to try to make and sell the thing, and trying to argue that the designers are [stupid/selfish/greedy/etc] says more about your intelligence than theirs. Yes, they are selfish - it's called capitalism. However, they are presumably trying to help people with the project. Is that so wrong that you have to post long rants about its futility? It isn't like they're going to harm anyone if the project fails... at the worst, a few more Indians will have typing skills. Whether they need them, or whether it will help them get a better job, isn't really foreseeable at this point, but personally I think that $12 is a good price for even a potentially useless [skill/computer]

 

[Unknown_K]

*Ahem*
Those people that you say have no pots to piss in are not the target market. Have fun with your straw man, though.

By the way, the US also has a large amount of people who are dirt poor and cannot buy computers. Just thought I'd bring that up while we're discussing the subject "things that have nothing whatsoever to do with the original topic."

I mentione a middle class in both China and India, and also mentioned there are poor people even in the USA. Did you not read it?

Kind of odd some western people are going to design a product, make it in china, and sell it in china that the chinese never thaught of needing themselves.

 

[porter]

Kind of odd some western people are going to design a product, make it in china, and sell it in china that the chinese never thaught of needing themselves.

Thinks of the irony of gunpowder......