4 ms·

I think the problem Obama hints at (but not really explains) is very real. We're the first generation with all the world's information at our fingertips. We co

by gizmo 16y ago

I think the problem Obama hints at (but not really explains) is very real. We're the first generation with all the world's information at our fingertips. We could all be polymaths, we could all get sound understanding of Philosophy, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Politics and so forth... but largely, we don't. Learning has never been easier, because you can get information in the format you want (audio, video, text, or interactive content) with a click of the mouse. You can pick between course material from dozens of universities and you can read papers written by academics all over the world. And yet, largely, we don't. We read blog posts that have near zero information content, and the ever present discussion threads where only the least controversial and inane posts rise to the top. But why? Why do we do this, when we know that we'd get much, much more from the internet if we used it to read well written and thoughtful content instead? Most likely it's just human nature. We're addicted to small bite-sized chunks of non-information. There are a lot of people who can read the internet all day, ever day, only to take breaks by watching TV shows and playing video games. Without ever getting bored. Day, after day, after day.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
euroclydon 16y ago
"papers written by academics all over the world" != "well written and thoughtful content" I think the power of the internet is not access to long boring and often useless or esoteric academic papers, but rather that the internet is the most powerful reference tool ever invented. It's information on demand. Rather than get a sound understanding of Chemistry, I can just look up the occasional chemical compound I am concerned with at the moment. Similarly, I can review individual historic topics at will, and math equations, and search large text volumes for Philosophical gems. Information a-la-cart is power, freedom, and leisure all rolled into one.
- jfager 16y ago
  There are more well-written and thoughtful academic papers available online than any person will ever make it through in a lifetime. The fact that many (or even most) don't rise to that distinction is irrelevant to the basic point. It's a rare person who can "look up the occasional chemical compound" to any effective end who hasn't already immersed themselves in the subject of chemistry to know why they are doing so and what the information they're getting back actually means. Information-at-will is unbelievably powerful and amazing, but it's not a substitute for in-depth study.
  - euroclydon 16y ago
    You're absolutely right. Those were the two flaws in my statements. But, my main point (however poorly stated) is that the internet should be viewed as a successful reference tool and not a failed enlightenment or educational tool.
  - chc 16y ago
    Actually, it is relevant to the basic point. If I could reliably look up well-written and interesting content on the Internet, that would be wonderful. But most of it is lost in a morass of crap. There's probably some level of "Human nature just doesn't incline us toward useful learning," but I think there's also just basic risk aversion: If I read a blog or forum, the information content might be low, but at least I have a good idea what I'm getting. I have no trouble finding an amusing and semi-informative blog, but finding a chemistry text that is useful to me is actually much harder, even though I'm sure there's probably more than one on this giant Web.
    - jamesbritt 16y ago
      It makes me think of going to the supermarket where there are 80 different breakfast cereals. Some of them might be healthy for me; I need to figure out which they are. Tedious but doable. Except in the Internet cereal aisle there are 80 thousand different breakfast cereals, unreliably organized. Yes, the healthy stuff is in there, but finding it is a whole other issue. Now I have to rely on a curator, and I need to know how best to find and pick one, which is a different sort of problem.
    - jfager 16y ago
      How do you find blogs you like to read? Google only gets you so far, so you come to places like HN. You still have to know where to look in order to wade through the masses of crap. "Low signal" is just a fundamental characteristic of the web at this point. I read CS papers. If that's what you're interested in, too, CiteSeer's Most Cited will last you years: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles
RyanMcGreal 16y ago
They said exactly the same thing after the printing press created the world's first generation with all the world's information at their fingertips. Somehow we'll manage to survive this onslaught of access to information as well.
9oliYQjP 16y ago
While I admit Obama has some points, the discussion is far too complex to address in a presidential speech and I don't think he struck the proper tone. A man with one watch knows the time; a man with two watches is never quite sure. His speech is a failure, because I think it was the effects of having so much information -- as the quote above mentions -- that he wanted to convey rather than the fact that we have this information in the first place. Presidential speeches are all about take-aways, and this was a miserable failure. The take-aways were "Xboxes, iPads, and technology are diversions" which I'm pretty sure was not his intention. We live in a world where the uneducated and uninformed speak in terms of certainty and absolutes. Liberals have long believed that if only you can debate and reason with your counterparts, you can sway them to your side. Conservatives figured out that this wasn't how human nature worked and I think the Republicans were particularly good throughout the mid 90s and this past decade, at providing a more reassuring world view that is black and white. The more educated we get, the more uncertain we can be about our opinions. I think Obama wanted to point out that the educated might lose control of political power. There is a very real possibility of a reality similar to that of Idiocracy taking hold, and I think Obama wanted to challenge his audience to ward this off. In order to do this, they'll have to learn how to speak to people and be masters of the human psyche. So it's kind of ironic that Obama failed so miserably at delivering his message. I'm sure he's kicking himself because the whole debate is now being framed around "is technology good or bad?".
- asnyder 16y ago
  This happens often in Obama's speeches. If you watch them whole they're insightful, well thought out, and very meaningful. However, both the visual and printed press have no patience to actually deliver the full content, but rather will always take a soundbite, or quote out of context, thus leaving the rest of the speech meaningless. It's unfortunate that the majority of Americans don't actually read or watch the speeches in whole. Personally, I think this is part of what he was getting at.
- euroclydon 16y ago
  Yeah, when is Obama going to realize that actions or theatrics will be a much more effective means of communicating his points than long thoughtful speeches? All he had to do, was wait for the opportunity to drop the bomb, preferably in a short sentence that leaves people jaws dropping, that he doesn't spend a bunch of time on games and media diversions, and (gasp!) he thinks they make people stupid.
jamesbritt 16y ago
" We're the first generation with all the world's information at our fingertips." We're a long way from "all the world's information" being available. What we have is a seemingly endless stream of information, but it is neither complete nor well-vetted. You spend considerable time wading through or past useless junk, ideally filter for the good stuff, but perhaps not knowing what's missing or what's really accurate.
jodrellblank 16y ago
> Learning has never been easier, The demotivation of seeing all the things you aren't learning and how vast the scope of things you could be learning has never been easier, either.
istari 16y ago
Who else is sick of hearing this message? Yes, we have unpreceduented access to information. But that just makes clear the real bottleneck to true learning is not lack of information, but lack of INTEREST. True progress in any field is made by the tiny group of people with burning passion in that field, clustered together and sharing ideas. Technology exposes us to more fields and connects us to more people than we would have been able to reach. That is its true value. Information by itself is worse than useless.

by gizmo 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

euroclydon 16y ago

"papers written by academics all over the world" != "well written and thoughtful content" I think the power of the internet is not access to long boring and often useless or esoteric academic papers, but rather that the internet is the most powerful reference tool ever invented. It's information on demand. Rather than get a sound understanding of Chemistry, I can just look up the occasional chemical compound I am concerned with at the moment. Similarly, I can review individual historic topics at will, and math equations, and search large text volumes for Philosophical gems. Information a-la-cart is power, freedom, and leisure all rolled into one.

jfager 16y ago
There are more well-written and thoughtful academic papers available online than any person will ever make it through in a lifetime. The fact that many (or even most) don't rise to that distinction is irrelevant to the basic point. It's a rare person who can "look up the occasional chemical compound" to any effective end who hasn't already immersed themselves in the subject of chemistry to know why they are doing so and what the information they're getting back actually means. Information-at-will is unbelievably powerful and amazing, but it's not a substitute for in-depth study.
- euroclydon 16y ago
  You're absolutely right. Those were the two flaws in my statements. But, my main point (however poorly stated) is that the internet should be viewed as a successful reference tool and not a failed enlightenment or educational tool.
- chc 16y ago
  Actually, it is relevant to the basic point. If I could reliably look up well-written and interesting content on the Internet, that would be wonderful. But most of it is lost in a morass of crap. There's probably some level of "Human nature just doesn't incline us toward useful learning," but I think there's also just basic risk aversion: If I read a blog or forum, the information content might be low, but at least I have a good idea what I'm getting. I have no trouble finding an amusing and semi-informative blog, but finding a chemistry text that is useful to me is actually much harder, even though I'm sure there's probably more than one on this giant Web.
  - jamesbritt 16y ago
    It makes me think of going to the supermarket where there are 80 different breakfast cereals. Some of them might be healthy for me; I need to figure out which they are. Tedious but doable. Except in the Internet cereal aisle there are 80 thousand different breakfast cereals, unreliably organized. Yes, the healthy stuff is in there, but finding it is a whole other issue. Now I have to rely on a curator, and I need to know how best to find and pick one, which is a different sort of problem.
  - jfager 16y ago
    How do you find blogs you like to read? Google only gets you so far, so you come to places like HN. You still have to know where to look in order to wade through the masses of crap. "Low signal" is just a fundamental characteristic of the web at this point. I read CS papers. If that's what you're interested in, too, CiteSeer's Most Cited will last you years: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles

RyanMcGreal 16y ago

They said exactly the same thing after the printing press created the world's first generation with all the world's information at their fingertips. Somehow we'll manage to survive this onslaught of access to information as well.

9oliYQjP 16y ago

While I admit Obama has some points, the discussion is far too complex to address in a presidential speech and I don't think he struck the proper tone. A man with one watch knows the time; a man with two watches is never quite sure. His speech is a failure, because I think it was the effects of having so much information -- as the quote above mentions -- that he wanted to convey rather than the fact that we have this information in the first place. Presidential speeches are all about take-aways, and this was a miserable failure. The take-aways were "Xboxes, iPads, and technology are diversions" which I'm pretty sure was not his intention. We live in a world where the uneducated and uninformed speak in terms of certainty and absolutes. Liberals have long believed that if only you can debate and reason with your counterparts, you can sway them to your side. Conservatives figured out that this wasn't how human nature worked and I think the Republicans were particularly good throughout the mid 90s and this past decade, at providing a more reassuring world view that is black and white. The more educated we get, the more uncertain we can be about our opinions. I think Obama wanted to point out that the educated might lose control of political power. There is a very real possibility of a reality similar to that of Idiocracy taking hold, and I think Obama wanted to challenge his audience to ward this off. In order to do this, they'll have to learn how to speak to people and be masters of the human psyche. So it's kind of ironic that Obama failed so miserably at delivering his message. I'm sure he's kicking himself because the whole debate is now being framed around "is technology good or bad?".

asnyder 16y ago
This happens often in Obama's speeches. If you watch them whole they're insightful, well thought out, and very meaningful. However, both the visual and printed press have no patience to actually deliver the full content, but rather will always take a soundbite, or quote out of context, thus leaving the rest of the speech meaningless. It's unfortunate that the majority of Americans don't actually read or watch the speeches in whole. Personally, I think this is part of what he was getting at.
euroclydon 16y ago
Yeah, when is Obama going to realize that actions or theatrics will be a much more effective means of communicating his points than long thoughtful speeches? All he had to do, was wait for the opportunity to drop the bomb, preferably in a short sentence that leaves people jaws dropping, that he doesn't spend a bunch of time on games and media diversions, and (gasp!) he thinks they make people stupid.

jamesbritt 16y ago

" We're the first generation with all the world's information at our fingertips." We're a long way from "all the world's information" being available. What we have is a seemingly endless stream of information, but it is neither complete nor well-vetted. You spend considerable time wading through or past useless junk, ideally filter for the good stuff, but perhaps not knowing what's missing or what's really accurate.

jodrellblank 16y ago

> Learning has never been easier, The demotivation of seeing all the things you aren't learning and how vast the scope of things you could be learning has never been easier, either.

istari 16y ago

Who else is sick of hearing this message? Yes, we have unpreceduented access to information. But that just makes clear the real bottleneck to true learning is not lack of information, but lack of INTEREST. True progress in any field is made by the tiny group of people with burning passion in that field, clustered together and sharing ideas. Technology exposes us to more fields and connects us to more people than we would have been able to reach. That is its true value. Information by itself is worse than useless.