The Received Wisdom
Episode 25: Science in Abortion Politics and the Failure of One Laptop Per Child ft. Morgan Ames
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- Scientists and scientific societies oppose overturning Roe v. Wade due to concerns about child health, social inequality, and scientific credibility.
- Elon Musk's potential takeover of Twitter raises concerns about concentrated power and implications for media governance.
- The One Laptop per Child project's failure highlights the limitations of techno-utopianism and the importance of inclusive implementation in technological initiatives.
Deep dives
The Funding Bias Towards Moonshots
Incremental community-based projects often struggle to secure funding, while moonshots receive funding despite being less grounded in communities and their needs.
The Power and Control of Tech Titans
Elon Musk's attempt to acquire and influence Twitter raises concerns about concentrating power in the hands of one individual and the implications for media governance.
Science's Role in the Abortion Debate
Scientists and scientific societies have voiced opposition to overturning Roe v. Wade, highlighting the potential negative impact on child health, social inequality, and the loss of scientific credibility in politically polarized debates.
The One Laptop per Child (OLPC) project aimed to provide low-cost laptops to children in the global south, but ultimately failed to achieve its lofty goals.
The One Laptop per Child (OLPC) project, initiated by the MIT Media Lab, sought to create affordable laptops for children in the global south. Despite the initial promise and enthusiasm surrounding the project, it ultimately fell short of its ambitious objectives. The OLPC laptop, with its green and white design and rugged features, was intended to revolutionize education and empower children with technological skills. However, the project faced significant challenges, including the lack of sales and failure to reach the intended target audience in the global south. The perceived benefits of the project, such as self-learning and global connectivity, did not materialize as expected. The OLPC project serves as a cautionary tale of the limitations of techno-utopianism and the complexities of implementing technological solutions in developing regions.
The OLPC project highlighted the dominance of techno-centric perspectives and overlooked the expertise and needs of local teachers and communities.
The OLPC project was primarily driven by computer programmers, professors, and technologically-minded individuals, with limited input from teachers, students, and parents in the global south. The project reflected an idealized vision of the 'technically precocious boy' as the target user, neglecting the diverse needs and perspectives of children in different contexts. The emphasis on self-learning and devaluing the role of teachers contributed to a dismissive attitude towards local educators. The project's reliance on charisma and hype, fueled by the belief in the transformative power of technology, overshadowed the importance of understanding local contexts and involving key stakeholders. Ultimately, the OLPC project highlights the necessity of recognizing and valuing the expertise of educators, engaging with local communities, and adopting a more inclusive approach in implementing technology-driven initiatives.
This month, Shobita and Jack discuss how scientists are engaging in the boiling politics of abortion in the United States, the implications of large language models (a new type of artificial intelligence), and Elon Musk's possible takeover of Twitter. And we have a fascinating conversation with Morgan Ames about her award-winning book The Charisma Machine, which focuses on the global One Laptop Per Child project. Ames is Professor of Practice at the School of Information and Associate Director of Research for the Center for Science, Technology, Medicine and Society at the University of California, Berkeley.
- Morgan G. Ames (2019). The Charisma Machine: The Life, Death, and Legacy of One Laptop Per Child. MIT Press.
- Morgan G. Ames (2021). "Laptops alone can’t bridge the digital divide." MIT Technology Review. October 27.
- Morgan G. Ames (2019). "Future Generations will Suffer if we Don't Solve Unequal Access to Tech." Pacific Standard. April 2.
- Morgan G. Ames (2019). "The Smartest People in the Room? What Silicon Valley’s Supposed Obsession with Tech-Free Private Schools Really Tells Us." LA Review of Books. October 18.
- Roger A. Pielke Jr. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
- Dan Sarewitz (2013). "Science must be seen to bridge the political divide." Nature. 493: 7.
- Johanna Okerlund, Evan Klasky, Aditya Middha, Sujin Kim, Hannah Rosenfeld, Molly Kleinman, Shobita Parthasarathy (2022). What’s in the Chatterbox? Large Language Models, Why They Matter, and What We Should Do About Them. Technology Assessment Project, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Project, University of Michigan.
- Richard Van Noorden (2022). "How language-generation AIs could transform science." Nature. April 28.
Study Questions:
1) What are the problems with scientists taking such a prominent role in the abortion debate, especially in the US?
2) What was the hope behind the One Laptop Per Child project, and how did it fail?
3) What biases lay underneath the One Laptop Per Child project, in the idea, the design, and the implementation?
4) What role does hype play in shaping our understanding of emerging technologies? What are its positive and negative dimensions?
5) Could a One Laptop Per Child-type project ever be successful? How?
Transcript available at thereceivedwisdom.org.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
