One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) Feedback

Feedback I sent to the OLPC project

Last November 28th, BBC's Mary Lou Jepsen discussed the question of India's non-participation in the OLPC project on “Digital Planet." Earlier, last August 15th, an Indian bureaucrat described OX-1 as “pedagogically suspect." This had made me furious, I sent a response which was read on-air by the BBC in a later episode. Bill Thompson, Digital Planet's resident technical expert, agreed I had a point. I send below that comprehensive reaction, in text and audio recording (MP3).

No longer furious, but highly energized by your kind attention, below this email*, I have organized my more substantive thoughts on the OX-1 initiative for the "Mark -II" version into four categories:

I. OX-1 Mark-II Operating System Interface and API

Ia. Aural bias

Ib. Keyboard

II. Integrative design (bag)

III. Distribution Strategy

IV. Summary and next steps

I am eager to discuss any of the above further; while I prefer aural discussion via Skype (paradaksha) I will, in this case, respond to emails, too; which, as you can see, can take a while as I have to grapple with the English language on the QWERTY keyboard.. I believe we owe it to a happier world for our children - and for the long haul on this initiative - to keep in touch on a regular basis. It would be an honor to hear again from you and/or the OX Team.

Shûbhamastû!

Vyôm Akhil

21º28' N, 83º58' E

-------------------------

I OX-1 Mark-II Operating System: Interface and API

Ia. INTERFACE Developers of the OX-1 Mark-II OS should prioritize creation, integration and manipulation of aural, or "spoken-only," interaction. A child's first experience of language is sound ALONE, independent of written text. In other words, a child's first language is a non-script, "spoken only," language. To encourage oral-aural interfaces, the OS can be engineered to encourage aural interaction and discourage the use of non-spoken (ie., typed) language. I advocate this perspective for the obvious reason stated above--a child is born as an oral creature, first--but for other reasons, perhaps less obvious, hence described below in greater detail.

I have the rare advantage of having a 'spoken-only' first language, and also a fluent speaker (and thinker) of Sanskrit.

A recent NASA project investigated a corpus of 150 human-computer languages to find that Sanskrit, which has a robust oral tradition, to be the most appropriate as the mediating language for cyber-human interfacing. NASA researcher Rick Briggs says on , "(T)here is a widespread belief that natural languages are unsuitable for the transmission of many ideas that artificial languages can render with great precision and mathematical rigor. But this dichotomy, which has served as a premise underlying much work in the areas of linguistics and artificial intelligence, is a false one“. More expansively supportive of this, is Vyaas Houston's essay, Sanskrit and the Technological Age NASA's theoretical finding is backed up by experience, I will share one example. I know a U.S. born-raised and resident linguist whose first language until college was English. Before he came across the above "life-changing" NASA report, he was an IT consultant-professional. Upon understanding the implications of the NASA report, this far-seeing visionary and global-patriot, who had studied postgraduate Sanskrit at Columbia U, switched to teaching the language to U.S. corporations. Commenting on his bilingualized mind, he had, in paraphrase, once said that after (using) Sanskrit, “coming back to English felt like walking in sludge".

I would not want children of a truly globalized world to be forced to use this 'sludge' for many other reasons, primary is its nonphonetic script that can only be learnt by heavy and - for a child - mind-numbing indoctrination called, spelling. "[Spelling is] a terror visited on human beings from the cradle onwards," said a Nobel laureate.

Ib. SOFT TECHNOLOGIES could make the OX-1 Mark-II Keyboard more ergonomically configurable. Was cloth considered? And QWERTY should be modified for our children. The reasons are well documented and do not bear repeating here.

II Integrative Design (bag)

PICTURES OF THE OX-1 show that it is a well designed stand-alone product. So the question is: Can the next version be designed to integrate better with the ambiance in which it will be used? I checked with a young school-going poor boy in my neighborhood. I showed him the 17 OX-1 photos I'd downloaded. "This will obviate the need for you to carry books to your school," I explained. "Will you still need your school bag?" He said, "Yes! I have to carry other stuff to school, too. My water bottle, my snacks-box, the toys and puzzles I play with during recess." So, I have, in my mind, the concept of a school-bag designed around the OX-1 that I shall be happy to pass on to the design team to work on.

III Distribution strategy

IN MY JANUARY 18 EMAIL I wrote, "the OLPC project.. has all the makings of an enduring and desirable revolution, probably in the truly global 'umbrella, bicycle and electric bulb' category." I should have also included the more recent baseball cap, ballpoint pen and cellphone.

A striking feature of the fairly rapid (in historical terms) across-borders usage-ubiquity of all these inventions is the fact there is no record of any global strategy or governmental muscle pushing their spread. The OX-1 usage strategists might have greater success should they remember this common feature in my list of 'world-changing' inventions and innovations. I do have some observations and experience in what works and what doesn't in - what, for want of a better phrase, may be called the -"target area/group “and will be glad to share them with the OX-1 team.

IV. Summary and next steps

OX-I is an incredible tool to enable our children to think straight, act well, and lead their world. I fear the OX-I will fall short of this promise, unless it

• prefers aural interface to typed roman-character interface,
• is Sanskrit-enabled first and foremost, as this is NASA-proven the best man-machine language interface,
• offers a keyboard designed for the above use cases, rather than by QWERTY inheritance,
• is not standalone, but integrated into the child's life (ie., part of a bag),
• is distributed virally, by spontaneous self-interested adoption, rather than by governmental fiat