1,157
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Sugar is bad for you: new section
: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-XO images. -- [[User:Marcopg|Marcopg]]
: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-XO images. -- [[User:Marcopg|Marcopg]]
== Sugar is bad for you ==
If you're going to open up the whole "Sugar" nomenclature to comment, I might as well drop in a thought that has been on my mind since I started following OLPC. Sugar is simply an unfortunate name choice in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I think the concept of the UI and pedagological thought are just peachy, but the name "sugar" is just awful on so many levels.
My primary concern is that the cross-cultural facility of the graphical UI paradigm is overshadowed by the fact that the selection of "sugar" as a name falls so terribly short-of-the-mark with respect to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_competence cultural competence].
:Cultural competence refers to an ability to interact effectively with people of different cultures. Cultural competence is comprised of four components: (a) Awareness of one's own cultural worldview, (b) Attitude towards cultural differences, (c) Knowledge of different cultural practices and worldviews, and (d) cross-cultural Skills. Developing cultural competence results in an ability to understand, communicate with, and effectively interact with people across cultures.
::See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercultural_competence Intercultural competence] for some interesting examples, particularly the Brazilian translation of the American/European "A-OK" gesture.
Please bear with me while I provide some examples of why "sugar" is such a bad name. If one is the type to argue that '''oil''' is the one commodity that most typifies what is wrong with Western (particularly American) interaction with the rest of the world in the 20th and early 21st century, than one would also be inclined to argue that '''sugar''' was that commodity in the 17th through 19th centuries and that the social evils wrought by the economics of sugar are still very much with us today.
The historical role of sugar in driving the slave trade is well enough known. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_trade][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Brazil] That the sugar industry has an appalling human rights record that continues to this day in locations all over the world is perhaps less appreciated by some. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batey_%28sugar_workers%27_town%29][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Price_of_Sugar]. In Haiti, they still remember the American occupation from 1915-1934. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_American_Sugar_Company] The sugar industry's sponsorship of soccer teams in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Premier_League Ethiopia] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanzanian_Premier_League Tanzania] notwithstanding, I can't imagine that the modern sugar producers have much better records except where there are cooperatives. Even within the United States, sugar is not so sweet, being associated with massacres and corporate malfeasance [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanapepe_massacre][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Co.][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sugar_Point].
It's also very confusing in computer-related namespace with multiple conflicting and confusing uses [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarcrm][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Games][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUGAR_%28MEMS_Simulator%29][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntactic_sugar]
You might argue that the name Sugar has gained too much currency for a re-branding. I'll point out that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_%28GUI%29 Sugar (GUI)] doesn't rate a disambiguation page or or even a mention on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar Wikipedia's Sugar page].
On the other hand, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey Honey] seems to have warmer multi-cultural associations.
:No insult meant to the Sugar developers, whose work speaks for itself, but why let the name send the wrong message. "Sugar" just leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
[[User:Cjl|Cjl]] 01:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)