3 ms·
Well, if you think OLPC was a deliberate grift—I don't—then it's like the moral difference between scamming buyers looking for an Internet-connected juicer and
by md_ 5y ago
Well, if you think OLPC was a deliberate grift—I don't—then it's like the moral difference between scamming buyers looking for an Internet-connected juicer and scamming donors looking to help the world.
As a non-deliberate grift—I guess the same math applies? Wildly overpromising and underdelivering on a picnic cooler seems somehow less morally problematic than wildly overpromising and underdelivering on an effort to improve third-world childhood education.
Of course, the counterpoint is that Silicon Valley (or MIT Media Lab) bros whose hearts are in the right place deserve plaudits for their ill-informed-but-generally-well-meaning efforts, even if those efforts waste millions of dollars that could have gone to more effective altruistic endeavors.
Which, like, yeah, that's an argument, I guess?
- avs733 5y agoI think you are on the right track here, and its important. In the context of work with developing nations, the defense of good intentions is increasingly dismissed out of hand. Good intentions are often deeply problematic and can cause more harm than good - including capture/transfer of resources that could have been used in some other way improve conditions for people. c.f., many NGO projects to improve stove design in less developed countries [0] [0] https://nature.berkeley.edu/er100/readings/Crewe_1997.pdf https://nature.berkeley.edu/er100/readings/Crewe_1997.pdf
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]