100-Dollar Laptop: UN Secretary General’s Office shouldn’t be used for exploiting the poor

Submitted by _ on May 24, 2006 - 08:52.

My eyes were stuck to the news that the UN Secretary General Mr. Kofi Annan, while launching a 100-Dollar Laptop, on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Tunis, Tunisia, said “the invention is an impressive technical achievement. The project promises to provide flexible technology that can be used in any place, even in the desert without energy supply”. It is also reported that the U.N. is backing the project even with financial support thinking that it could help to promote education in the Third World. A professor and his team mates of MIT (USA) have claimed the credit for the project and the invention (!).

At the very outset, let me state certain hard facts, which I believe will largely explain the title of today’s write-up. Long 31 years ago, in 1975, I invented the Free-play Radio technology and demonstrated a working model in a jam-packed press conference on 23 July 1975 in Dhaka. The news came out in almost all the news papers in the country in addition to an editorial the following day. Raymond Lee Organization, Inc.(USA) wanted to take initiatives for patenting the invention and marketing the product (Receipt No.71001, dated 13 February 76 ) when I contacted them from the then West Germany. On the request of Bangladesh Science Museum, a working model was presented to them in 1978. The invention, although apparently a simple (addition of storage facility to a hand generator) one, was never conceived and publicly demonstrated by anyone on this earth before 23 July1975. It opened the gate for free playing and playing low-powered electrical gadgets and equipments in remote and yet vast electricity-less areas of the world.. Thus the technology is especially handy for mass communication, mass literacy, emergency weather forecasting or as a life-saving communications tool following a natural disaster (be it in the coastal areas of the Bay of Bengal or New Orleans city), mass-scale low-powered emergency medical equipments etc. However, to reduce the price of a product with free-play facility and bring its price closer to the product without that facility, mass-scale production was a necessity, for which the desire to do so by the wealthy and powerful people who rule and control the world economy was also essential. But it appears that the world leaders were not keen to give the green signal unless and until the very free-play technology could be hijacked, first by the British and then by the Americans.

In 1989, I sent a brief on my inventions and research works (including the free-play radio) to ITDG (UK) in the hope of mutual cooperation. In reply, they informed me that they would be establishing an office in Dhaka soon and re-contact me after that. But they never contacted me again, although they opened their office in Dhaka alright. One fine morning, on 28 August 1996 to be precise, through a British High Commission press release in a local daily, a company named Bay-Gen proclaimed itself to be the inventor (!) of the Free-play radio, which was reported to be developed under British technical and financial assistance under the ODA program. Immediately after the British press release, a wave of protests flooded the news papers and periodicals in terms of editorials, post-editorials, features, letters etc. in the country. Bangladesh Patent Office gave me recognition as the inventor of the Free-play radio and congratulated me for the invention and wished all success. The Bangladesh Govt. and I contacted the British High Commission, Bay-Gen company and the British Patent Office, but no to-the-point replies were received. Understandably so, since the UK Patent Office awarded a patent to a British named Trevor Bayliss in the 90’s on a technology which was in display in the Bangladesh Science Museum since 1978 and which was publicly demonstrated even before, i.e. in 1975, which is not only unethical but also highly illegal.

The illegal invention of Bay-Gen received BBC product design award 1996 also. When the matter was raised to the BBC, they replied “development of the Bay-Gen is not a BBC matter”. A question was asked on the conscience of the BBC “Had it been the other way round i.e. a British invention in 1975, could you still have given a BBC product design award to a Bangladeshi company in 1996 and a reply to the British inventor “…..not a BBC matter” ? But no reply was received. According to a report titled “Launch set to go like clockwork” published in a foreign news paper, Bay-Gen received a multi-million pound cash boost from the GEC(USA) and planned to produce devices like free-play radio (originally planned for use in African bush fighting aids, with the blessing of the President Nelson Mandela, would go on sale throughout the world for about 50 pounds), mobile-phone charger, torch light, even TV sets etc. in its plan to launch a billion-pound business. During the recent war with Iraq the BBC talked about (and showed the product) using 5000 free-play radios by the allied forces. The 100-dollar laptop authorities must have acquired the hand-cranking free-play technology’s manufacturing right from the illegal patent holder as already mentioned above. A hand-cranking mobile-charger is recently being flooded in the local market @ USD 2, and appears to be a Chinese/Taiwanese product although no manufacturer’s name is printed, without caring for any patent rights.

The President of a Japanese company appears to be right. He came to Dhaka towards the end of December’04 to discuss with me the modalities of acquiring the manufacturing rights of my new invention of free-electricity (2002) and commented on my new invention “the Americans will not care for your patent on such technologies, some Japanese companies may care but not every company will and the Chinese wouldn’t take more than seven days to reach your home with a manufactured product if they get a prototype”. He further added “some people told me that you did not elaborate in certain places in your patent paper”. I replied “75% answer of your question have just been replied by you yourself. Besides, there is hardly any time left to complete the patent formalities for the invention. I am not sitting idle, I am trying to develop a better process, and also to make a prototype with that”. At that time, I also discussed with him about my hand-cranking mobile-charger technology which he appreciated and now I can see the manufactured product in the market.

My new invention of Free-electricity has already been registered with World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) with a filing No. PCT/IB03/03366 dated 04 August 2003. The 44-page story with diagrams and a very favorable search report from the American Patent Office (USPTO) acting as the International Searching Authority (ISA), has also been published by the WIPO in the form of a booklet and is also in the display of WIPO website since 04 March 2004, under publication No. WO 2004/019476 dated 04 March 2004 (revised on 22 April 2004 for correction and again on 22 July 2004 to accommodate the ISA report). Actually, the ISA report dated 21 April 2004 from the USPTO was delayed by about 5 months. When the legal section of WIPO was contacted, they replied “there may be special circumstances where time is needed to resolve matters arising in connection with important workload in certain technical areas etc. As to your particular case, I would suggest that you contact the USPTO directly. You may also inquire about any refunds in such a case.” Accordingly, I contacted the USPTO, but I did not get a proper reply.

On 04 July 2004, the patent paper of my new invention was sent to many notable eastern/western universities of the world for their evaluation and comments. Although the “Innovation” magazine of Singapore National University opined it to be a “too high level research work”, the aforesaid MIT (USA) refused to give any comment on it. People started saying that the MIT was busy in building a mobile laptop using Bangladeshi technology and therefore it refused to talk at that time. Energy Technology Innovation Project of Harvard University (another university of USA) replied “we (the project of Harvard) do not do any original research either of science or of technology”. Most of the Universities of the Western world replied “this is not our project, we do not want to be involved”. My answer to all the universities was “I certainly honor your decision if it is honest and non-racial. But the way my free-play technology was hijacked, how can I be sure”? I did not get any further reply. A journal of the Physics faculty of a notable university of Canada was almost ready to publish the paper. But they asked me for my postal address on the plea of “addressing me properly”. As soon as they found out that I am from the Third World, they did not correspond with me any more. A New York born President of the Conserve Energy Engg. Inc. wrote to me while reading my paper “I am impressed with the parts that I have read. The dangers in bringing forth a low cost or free energy source, dangers that you must be aware of by now, the "powers to be" or most certainly in the USA, Corporate America and also the worldwide Oil Mafia, will do just about anything to protect their interests”. Not a single university however could point out any fault in my paper and I strongly believe that my pressure-motion equivalence theory is correct and there is no scientific basis behind Newton’s third law of motion.

Although I received a local patent on my new invention of Free-electricity (and a very favorable search report from the International Searching Authority), I could not manage patents in other countries for want of sky-high financial requirements. Since I am a member of the International Federation of Inventors’ Association (IFIA), Switzerland, and the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers (IEEE),USA, and an invited scientist of many inventors’ associations like East West Euro Intellect, World Association of Inventors, SIMED etc., I had requested the inventors’ associations to try to make an arrangement to evaluate a WIPO published patent paper with a favorable search report , after the leading universities of the world had expressed reluctance to do so. An inventor cannot plead his case himself in the national phase of an international patent application. An attorney or at least an address of correspondence in that particular country is required, which is highly expensive and really impossible for an inventor of a Third World country. As it is, the basic fees for pursuing a patent are exorbitantly high too.

Coming back to the comments of the UN Secretary General on the 100-Dollar Laptop, it is worth mentioning that there was again a wave of protests in the leading local dailies against the hijacking of the Bangladeshi technology of Free-play Radio by the100-Dollar project authorities. On the question of 100-Dollar Laptop’s technical achievement as opined by the UN Secretary General, I became tired and was unable to find any such thing. The Linux operating system, the flash memory instead of hard disks/CD-Rom drives, the LCD displays (the dual-mode display as claimed by the project was not operational in the WSIS prototype. The prototypes were shown with conventional transmission TFT LCD displays)etc. are pretty old technologies. Cheap components have been used in the 100-Dollar Laptop. But one who knows about the definition of “invention”, should understand that merely using cheap things to reduce the price does not constitute an invention. Use of "parasitic power" of typing, although not a totally new idea, could however be considered an achievement if it could be economically and reliably utilized. But I am afraid, this seems not to be the case so far. Using of low-cost, low-power and high-resolution eInk displays will be a good idea, but the project’s undisclosed technology appears to be not a novel one either and understandtably the project has no plans to patent their display innovations(!). As far I understand, the project authorities are not confident enough to bring such display innovations(!) in the market before the hardy Chinese (without any UN backing or multimillion pound cash boost from GEC,USA). At the UN conference in Tunisia, several African officials, most notably Marthe Dansokho of Cameroon and Mohammed Diop of Mali were suspicious of the motives of the project, and claimed that the project was using an overly American mindset that presented solutions not applicable to specifically African problems. Dansokho said the project demonstrated misplaced priorities. Diop specifically attacked the project as an attempt to exploit a new market under the guise of "non-profitability". He further added “It is a very clever marketing tool. Under the guise of non-profitability hundreds of millions of these laptops will be flogged off to our governments. That's the only way of achieving the necessary economies of scale to get the price low. They've finally found a way of selling to a huge number of poor people. Even at a hundred dollars, as the well dressed Africans were pointing out last night, these things are absolutely not a bargain for an African child. Schooling for a year would make more sense. Better food would be nice. If it ever does make sense for Africa's children all to have laptops, this will surely not be until the price of them goes down to something nearer to ten dollars than a hundred. My guess is they will all have mobiles long before. And we don't need to give this one away. If somebody puts in the research to design the thing and really, really optimizes for cost, I'm sure there's a Chinese factory somewhere you can build it for”. Mr. Bill Gates in his criticism said "The world's poorest two billion people desperately need healthcare, not laptops".

Unfortunately, my “free-play” technology has been hijacked and incorporated in the 100-Dollar Laptop to reach a vast population of electricity-less poor people (without incorporating free-play technology this wouldn’t have been possible). Even a profit margin of barely USD 25 in the cleverly designed marketing plan of “one laptop per chid(OLPC)”suggests a profit of only(!) USD 50 billion, from the world’s poorest two billion people.What a Nobel-prize winning maketing plan indeed!

The western world preaches for open-market economy, but this OLPC maketing plan (with a minimum market lot of 1-million) will be executed through the corrupt governments (the beneficiaries of so-called western assistance programs through World Bank,IMF etc. while the common people have to shoulder all the loans with cleverly designed effective heavy interests), so-called donors, absolutely loyal to their masters the NGOs, and other similar arrangements under the umbrella of UN. One Mr. Lee opined "The U.N. is backing the project because it can help promote education in the Third World". But the question is, what is the per capita income of the vast targetted people? I am afraid, the figure may not be very much away from USD100, if the income of the western so-called assistance nourished so-called elite groups are not taken into account.Therefore, after being forced to buy a 100-Dollar Laptop, he wouln’t have anything to eat, anything to live on or anything to wear (attire is a must for the poor, although optional for the western people). However, the OLPC project will be first launched in countries like Nigeria, Egypt, India, China, Brazil , Argentina and Thailand. Between five million and 15 million units are expected to be provided to these countries.

Actually, even the computers failed to calculate the wealth gathered by the powerful and leading arms-producing countries of the world each year. They invest the surplus wealth in a highly profitable business of so-called assistance programs (in terms of interest, supporting even the misdeeds of the so-called donors, listening to harmful dictations, serving as an assured market and accepting all kinds of garbage tools and so-called experts etc.) by channeling the money through the world Bank, IMF, loyal NGOs and similar tools. They create and spread conflict and corruption and demoralize the people in other countries in order to sell their arms and to arrest their progress with an ultimate view of keeping a vast assured market and less powerful nations to rule.

In the WSIS, Mr. Kofi Annan also said “This is not just a matter of giving laptop to each child, as if bestowing on them some magical charm. The magic lies within-within each child, within each scientist, scholar or just plain citizen in the making. This initiative is meant to bring it forth into the light of day”, but the question is why should anyone be a scientist in the third world country? To give scope to the western world for hijacking their inventions or to helplessly tolerate USPTO delaying the search report by 5 months (on grounds of special circumstances where time is needed to resolve matters arising in connection with important workload in certain technical areas etc.) without giving compensations or to become a puppet to the whims of the rich people where “intellectual property” has been very cleverly and effectively been shaped as “rich people’s property” or to get no answers either from the governments or from patent offices on the question of alleged hijacking of inventions or to discover racism in leading western universities when they were reluctant/failed to evaluate a science paper or simply to be a victim of the West /oil Mafia in trying to do good to mankind?

If the UN sincerely believes in the welfare of the third world, why shouldn’t it try at least a few following things:

1. Close all the arms manufacturing plants in the world.

2. Make “intellectual property” as an “intellectual property” in reality and not “rich people’s property” effectively :

(a) Make arrangements so that an individual scientist of the Third World can get a patent for the whole world with a maximum expenditure of USD 100. He should be allowed to plead his case himself and perform all the necessary formalities from his own residence through correspondence with his own equivalent currency.

(b) Fully assist in fighting the “hijacking of inventions” cases, including my one in the International Court of Justice.

(c) Make arrangements to evaluate a WIPO published patent paper with a favorable search report.

3. Monitor the ill-motivated so-called assistance programs through IMF, World Bank, loyal to their masters the NGOs and similar tools of the West.

4. Do not be a party to the huge profit-making programs of the West by exploiting the poor in disguise of humanity, child care, education and God knows what not.

5. Do not allow the West to escape competition from hardy nations under the umbrella of the UN by marketing any product forcibly (invisible) in huge numbers through corrupt governments, so-called donors, loyal NGOs and similar agencies.


Written by: Nazmul Huda ,
38/10 Siddheswari Road
, Dhaka-1217, Bangladesh. E-mail : nazinvbd@yahoo.com


. . . . .
Submitted by joris on May 30, 2006 - 04:36.
I'm sorry to hear that your technology has been hijacked. I also agree that the money could be better spend on schooling and things like disease controll. I keep thinking about the child dying of malaria playing minesweeper on his $100 dollar laptop. The $100 dollar laptop is so much more romantic and significant(to western companies, just compare their charity efforts they love building schools, not so much into buying books, since school buildings seem so much more significant, and the pictures are better. It seems better to them than providing people with one dollar malaria nets. They think of their own situations: I have a computer, it helps me, lets me learn, lets me make money let us spread this prosperity. They can not conceptulize living with the tse tse fly. It's also by virtue more alligned with rich tech companies and what they do. It is however not as immediate a concern as clean drinking water, reading skills, jobs etc.  But could you not believe for an instant that these companies and organisations sponsoring the $100 laptop, have intentions that are honourable and that they believe in the project? Could you not believe that they think that this will help with education and participation in the global economy? I also disagree with your $ 25 margin estimate, gross margins on regular PC's are much much smaller than this(single digits in %, except if your apple) so one would expect a bare bones PC to carry less. And although parts suppliers will make money on this it does not seem to be that the organisations themselves will make any margin. I do comiserate with the way in which your invention has been treated and furthermore applaud your idea of providing inexpensive accessible patent protection to third world inventors, this is truly one of the best, and cheapest, ideas I've heard in a long time.
Submitted by Anonymous on May 31, 2006 - 05:42.
The problem is the rhetoric that has been used to promote the laptop. The images that are constantly conjured are of the poorest of the poor sitting on earthen floors browsing the web on their laptops during the little time not devoted to staying alive by the sweat of their brows. Mainly impoverished agricultural economies. But that's not the true population of people that need these things. Many areas of the Middle East & SE Asia, for instance, which are fairly industrialized but by Western standards poor, are where these will be most helpful. One place they will not be distributed is among the poor of Western nations, such as the United States. i think it's ridiculous. By virtue of being an American citizen & not absolutely destitute, I would not be considered poor by world standards, but by US standards I am far below the poverty threshhold. I have three children in school, & these would allow me to provide my children with learning tools that I otherwise can't. Don't forget the 'other America' spoken of by Michael Harington. It still exists.
Submitted by Alexander Barth on May 31, 2006 - 13:19.

To me there is a very obvious hitch in the 100$ laptop by the One Laptop Per Child Initiative (OLPC).

 

A laptop of 100$ can’t obviously be sold in least developed countries, where average incomes are well below this amount. Poverty is roughly defined by a daily income less than 1$. You would have to distribute these laptops for free.

 

Say, the 100$ laptop is nearly as useful and versatile as OLPC says *). Why shouldn’t the child, or her parents, sell the laptop? Perhaps not for the 100$ catalog price, but for 10$, just for buying food for the family in a hard week? This is a very likely outcome. Think of donated clothes ending up on African and Latin American markets.

 

OLPC errs horridly on the aspect of ownership, I cite from http://www.laptop.org/faq.en_US.html :

 

“Why is it important for each child to have a computer? What’s wrong with community-access centers?
(…) Furthermore, there are many reasons it is important for a child to own something—like a football, doll, or book—not the least of which being that these belongings will be well-maintained through love and care.”

 

Benefit not ownership is the reason for taking care of something. The 100$ laptop won’t reach the poor. It definitely makes sense to deploy modern Internet and communication technologies to fight poverty **) but distributing 100$ laptops will probably only feed one poor kid's family for a week per laptop.

 

–Alex

 

PS: http://del.icio.us/lx_barth/100dollarlaptop

 

——-
*) http://www.laptop.org/faq.en_US.html :
“What can a $1000 laptop do that the $100 version can’t?
Not much. The plan is for the $100 Laptop to do almost everything. What it will not do is store a massive amount of data.”
**) e. g. http://globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?menuid=201&parentid=179


Submitted by joris on June 1, 2006 - 07:43.
I agree with anonymous that cheap computers will help a lot of people who are poor as opposed to absolutely poor lets say. I also see that learning and skills will help lift people out of poverty. I also dream of these kind of initiatives allowing poor people to compete in the global economy. ie a person who is just getting by can offer their services directly to the west and so secure a stable income. I do believe that poverty exists in the west and that something should be done about it. If, however, I had to spend/give a dollar and it would either go to someone in a 2,000  $'s GDP per capita country or someone in a country with a GDP per capita of 42,000 I would probably spend it on the latter. The differences between having a tough time getting by in a western country, and I don't want to offend or downplay your situation, and  having a tough time in a two dollar a day country is significant. The thing I'm struggling with is, will $100 laptops be better than mosquito nets?
Submitted by laura on August 7, 2006 - 17:07.
i think the 100 dallor lap top is great when will it come out?
Submitted by Rob Katz on August 8, 2006 - 08:18.
According to the 100-dollar laptop web site, the computers will be manufactured later this year or early next: [they will be] ready for shipment by the end of 2006 or early 2007. Manufacturing will begin when 5 to 10 million machines have been ordered and paid for in advance.

While India has decided not to order the laptops, the government of Nigeria and, I believe, Brazil have committed for 1 million each. So the OLPC team is probably waiting for another 3 million in committments before they will start manufacturing them. Hope this helps.
Submitted by Godwin Isaac on August 12, 2006 - 05:19.
i'm interested in buying this item(shouldn’t be used for exploiting the poor) if it still available for sell get back as soon as possible an the condition of the goods thanks
Submitted by Anonymous on October 8, 2006 - 21:01.
i have invented a new , long usable life,multipurposes,high performance,affordable, socially acceptable,POU,practical, simple , system for water purification, to be use by needy people in remote areas and third world,the system is possible to save so many lifes especially children the new system is much difference than other inventions in the field, my question who may be intrested ?, and possible to support?should i keep this patent for ever?, while its pssible to help those people,how can i protect my rights?, how to put my name on this precious product?, on the other hand i have won a prize in a national competition in my country for ANOTHER project for improving poors life
Submitted by Anonymous on January 18, 2007 - 23:22.
Nobel Laureate Dr. Yunus : Let charity begin at home In a recent interview with a young group of representatives of the Hong Kong Bridge Society, Professor Yunus identified the weak political system as the root cause of corruption and held the political parties responsible for nourishing the same. In his typical style, especially after wearing the current crown of the debated Nobel Peace Prize, he prescribed yet again a poor and wilfully “distracting from the root cause” solution, by asking the children to revolt against their parents by showing strong hatred to them in such cases. Although I do not endorse his ideas or solutions, I would expect him to let charity begin at home in testing his own prescription. Professor Yunus must be aware that an official request has already been made on 10.12.06, in response to an appeal by the Durniti Daman Commission (a new and supposed to be independent version of the former Anticorruption Bureau) to enquire on the allegation of illegally smuggling out of Bangladesh, thousands of crores of taka (worth a few thousand Nobel prize money and the highest-scale corruption in a single sector which evidently made Bangladesh much poorer and the drainage of huge amount of money is still continued) by the Grameen Phone and the Grameen Bank. The complaint also includes illegally snatching sky-high interests by bluffing the 70 lac simple women folk borrowers. The matter was published on 04.12.06 in the Daily Ittefaq too. According to a report published in the daily Ittefaq on 18.12.06, Professor Yunus confessed that a share holder of Grameen Phone is responsible for illegally snatching crores of taka from the poor people of Bangladesh. Grameen Phone was enjoying the monopoly of mobile phone business since 1996. Recently, in the competitive market, they had to drastically reduce the price of their sim cards to Tk. 500/- from Tk.1,50,000/- (!) , call charge per minute to Tk.0.80 from Tk. 7.00, recharge system to monthly/biyearly/yearly basis from only 21 days, which obviously makes the allegation of illegally smuggling out of Bangladesh, thousands of crores of taka justifiable, on the basis of their more than 1-crore subscribers. It is not unknown anymore to anybody that because of the friendship with Mr. Clinton (since his studentship) and Ms. Hillary and the service of President Clinton as the “Chief Publicist” of Professor Yunus and “many other reasons ” which pleased (!) the western world, Professor Yunus was a top favorite person to the West. Therefore, the people certainly has the right to ask Professor Yunus, how effective was his influence (backed by the interested powerful western countries) in getting the right of monopoly mobile phone business in the country for Grameen Phone and which government(s) and govt. servant(s) were responsible for giving that gift of monopoly, and why he is admitting all these now after thousands of crores of taka have already been looted out illegally from the poor people of Bangladesh and why didn’t he unveil the conspiracy beforehand. Regarding Grameen Bank, let a research oriented write-up styled as “Grameen Bank : Poverty alleviation or elevation” (1994), published in 1995 in largely circulated dailies and periodicals be referred to. The research work was sent to many places both at home and abroad including Grameen Bank, Ministry of Finance and Bangladesh Bank for their comments and necessary action. Later, many similar write-ups and letters on Grameen Bank and NGO’s have also been published, each in the largely circulated dailies and periodicals in the last more than one decade. But no reply has yet been received from any authority including Grameen Bank. Although, there were many allegations against Grameen Bank in those write-ups and letters, only 4(four) of them are placed today. (1) Effective minimum rate of interest on general loans of Grameen Bank is 36% (correctly 43.63%). (2) It is better to take loans from the blood-sucking money lenders offering loans @ 219% interest than from Grameen Bank, because of the additional hard conditions of Grameen Bank, besides interests. (3) The propaganda that “Grameen Bank gives loan without any security” is nothing but a complete bluff. (4) The Western countries become very happy if a portion of their uncountable and surplus wealth from the sale of arms is reinvested in the exorbitantly high interest oriented poverty business, since they get hardly any place to invest such a huge wealth with guaranteed return. Elaborate discussions have been made in the above mentioned write-ups. In a recent interview with the TV channel-I, Professor Yunus, on the question of money lending at exorbitantly high rate of interest replied “various comments are normal in new kinds of ventures”. No, Dr. Yunus, your such answers or even hundreds of foreign Nobel certificates aren’t acceptable answers to the very serious type of allegations against Grameen Bank. Therefore, I would expect the family members of Professor Yunus to revolt and pressurize him either to accept the serious allegations like making the motherland poorer to a great extent and illegally snatching sky-high interests by bluffing 70 lacs of simple women folk borrowers or to face the long over due challenges with courage and honesty, by arranging a seminar in the presence of a patriotic media. On the question of root causes of corruption, well-planned poverty sustainability and moral degradation programs, discussions have been made in the above mentioned write-ups and also in a recent world wide widely publicized (more than 6090 international sites including Wikipedia and Guardian Unlimited, many commercial CDs have also been brought) article titled “100-Dollar Laptop: UN Secretary General’s Office shouldn’t be used for exploiting the poor”. Nazmul Huda 38/10 Siddheswari Road, Dhaka-1217 nazinvbd@yahoo.com

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Basic HTML tags are accepted.
  • To ensure that you are human, your comment must first be previewed, then posted to the site. Please click "Preview" to see how your comment will look when posted.