werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (06/19/83)
Being a member of the fortunate few hundred millions of this planet, whose life of plenty, somehow (I am quite certain) is made possible by the less fortunate few billions, I catch my mind wandering off trying to come up with ideas to lessen the thoughts of uneasy guilt which interrupt my hard work or play. What follows is an oldie-but-goodie idea, about which I can't make up my mind; are there more arguments for than against? So here it is, your critical thoughts are invited: SOFTWARE AS FOREIGN AID The main problem of giving something to someone else is that I am left with less than before, and where do I draw the line to giving? Does this describe the reason, why there is no more AID to others, foreign and otherwise? So what could be better than giving something without being left with less than before? Yes, I put software in that category. Putting aside the argument of "lost profits" of a potential sale, giving software sounds like a sure-fire thing. The question is, of course, would/could it be useful? Yes, of course, some hardware must come with it, and some training, ah yes, and maintenance of hard/software, the most(?) important part for prolonged usefulness of such a package. Now, assuming that every banana republic (I do LIKE bananas and the people and countries growing them) is already getting hardware for "defensive" and other progress-inspiring purposes, I take the liberty to ignore all but the software aspect. Can we help generate some progress to make people happier, healthier, better fed, clothed, housed, and educated by giving them software? I keep my thoughts of pros and cons to myself (for the moment) to keep this message short and to give you a wide-open space for ideas. Also, let your comments guide the discussion to home either in net.misc or net.politics or net.followup -- personally, I have no preference and try to follow all three.
debray@sbcs.UUCP (Saumya Debray) (06/21/83)
An interesting idea. The question that has to be answered is, how relevant will this aid be? Software is useful in information-intensive situations. Most countries that really *rely* on foreign aid are a long way from this. Their needs are, essentially, aids to ease the transition from predominantly agrarian/nomadic lifestyles to more balanced ones with a strong industrial base. One important factor in this transition is education, and I think CAI could be useful here; this type of software might be good foreign aid; I'm doubtful whether other types of software would be very useful. Another point to be remembered is that in technologically underdeveloped societies beginning to develop industrially, unemployment is generally high (as machines begin to take over tasks that used to require a lot of manpower), and under such conditions computers and automation are regarded with hostility by the general populace (because one computer can replace whole offices full of people). In order for aid to be useful, it has to be popularly accepted. On the plus side, software, unlike other forms of aid, probably cannot be easily diverted for the profit of corrupt officials. Saumya Debray ...philabs!sbcs!debray
pollack@uicsl.UUCP (06/23/83)
#R:ut-ngp:-35300:uicsl:16300008:000:1141 uicsl!pollack Jun 23 01:38:00 1983 It is hard to respond seriously to this one, folks. The educational systems of "never-allowed-to-be-developing" countries, say, like Guatemala, are not up to training the people even to simulate a Turing Machine. Since they have no computers, and cannot run the software themselves, it is basically useless. Maybe starving children can eat floppy disks. The only kind of computers available in such countries are used to maintain subversive lists and monitor the flow of water and electricity (overuse may indicate a guerrilla "safehouse"). Providing free software for this purpose is equivalent to providing bullets. Besides, your main contention is that if we gave software for foreign aid, we would not be losing anything. I infer from this that you think we get nothing for our current form of aid. Rest assured that the aid we pour into such countries is only considered overhead, and the (fixed) cost of maintaining corrupt regimes which repress their people is deemed smaller than the variable costs of yearly cost-of-living raises to organized workers. You are getting cheap bananas and cheap semiconductor chips: TANSTAAFL.