3 ms·

> people in sales, marketing, or in management positions -- have grown up with computers. This doesn't mean anything. Have you watched some 15-22 year olds int

> people in sales, marketing, or in management positions -- have grown up with computers. This doesn't mean anything. Have you watched some 15-22 year olds interact with computers lately? (I'm 23, for reference). They don't hunt and peck on the keyboard in stereotypical fashion but they're just as clueless for anything besides basic interactions. They -are- essentially tech illiterate once they step outside of google sheets, etc, or the web browser in general. I'm tired of hearing people say "digital native" like it means anything with regards to tech literacy. We're going to have another generation come in and take power that has zero idea of how computers function. At least we understood this and factored this in about the last generation- now we just assume the new generation knows things because they grew up using apps. If anything, the new generation is more illiterate on average, but with better mechanical facilities and understanding of typical modern UX for apps.

alxlaz 7y ago
> They -are- essentially tech illiterate once they step outside of google sheets, etc, or the web browser in general. 25 years ago there were people who were essentially tech illiterate as soon as they were put in front of a computer, not just when they stepped outside of Google sheets or the web browser in general. You think having grown up with computers, in a world where technology is easily-available and part of pop culture means nothing, but it has been years since I've last had to explain a grown-up that some computers are faster than others, that something which is available on paper can be made easily made available on a computer (scanning, photography etc.), what a server is, or that a website can become unavailable if too many people access it. It used to be that writing for a non-technical audience entailed unthinkable effort for seemingly trivial things. Not just explaining technical terms. We had lists of words we had to be especially careful with because they also had non-technical meanings, and if someone wasn't aware of that, they could get the wrong idea. That list included words like "server", "mouse" and "window", and I've personally seen grown-up people standing behind imposing desks who got really confused upon hearing these words without the proper context. Eight year-olds who just learned how to read and write can pick up a word processor with way less effort than eight year-olds (and non-technical fifty year-olds) could twenty years ago. They understand, for example, how scrolling works. Teaching people how to use a word processor used to entail explaining things such as "you can keep typing once you're at the end of the page". You needed to say that explicitly because the interface didn't seem to have any way for you to get another sheet of paper once you filled one up. People would write things on a page until they got near the bottom, then proceeded to stare quizzically at the screen wondering how they could get another one -- because that's exactly what they did in real life. I'm not saying that people who grew up with computers don't need to be told what TCP is and what a load balancer does. But they do have an intuitive understanding of things that a non-technical audience from twenty years ago didn't have. Including super basic things that you take for granted now, but it used to be that you couldn't -- that things from the Internet don't show up on your computer instantly, that how quickly they do depends on the quality of a connection, that computers need to be given explicit instructions each time (i.e. they'll always ask if you want to save your work before quitting -- they'll never figure out that you always say yes).
- andrewzah 7y ago
  I'm not arguing that people aren't better at using computers than the previous generation. I'm arguing they aren't necessarily more -literate-. I'm saying that intuitively understanding UX is different than understanding how a computer works. I don't trust either generation to be competent enough to enact legislation regarding computers.
saagarjha 7y ago
Your definition of “tech literacy” is way skewed. These people are able to use technology to do what they need: they’re tech literate. They can talk with their friends over the internet, create and layout documents, print posters, do research; they’re fluent across multiple devices and platforms; many of them interact with some sort of computer for hours each day. What more do you want them to do? (I’m in the age range you specified, by the way.)
- andrewzah 7y ago
  My definition involves understanding how computers work to a decent degree outside of basic app usage. Being mechanically efficient at using computers (and by this, I mean being efficient at using carefully- designed apps) does not count in my eyes. If any problem occurs, or if one has to do anything outside of the basic app flow, then people go blank. I operate a car daily, does that make me car literate? I understand mechanically how to operate a car, but if anything out of the ordinary occurs I have no idea what to do. Except to call someone who is actually car literate to fix the problem. Usage does not correlate with literacy. When a problem occurs, I've seen many people not even read the error messages or display basic critical thinking ability. I can't call this tech literacy. > They can talk with their friends over the internet, create and layout documents, print posters, do research This is a testament to programmers and UX designers making easy to use applications, not people being "tech literate".

alxlaz 7y ago

> They -are- essentially tech illiterate once they step outside of google sheets, etc, or the web browser in general. 25 years ago there were people who were essentially tech illiterate as soon as they were put in front of a computer, not just when they stepped outside of Google sheets or the web browser in general. You think having grown up with computers, in a world where technology is easily-available and part of pop culture means nothing, but it has been years since I've last had to explain a grown-up that some computers are faster than others, that something which is available on paper can be made easily made available on a computer (scanning, photography etc.), what a server is, or that a website can become unavailable if too many people access it. It used to be that writing for a non-technical audience entailed unthinkable effort for seemingly trivial things. Not just explaining technical terms. We had lists of words we had to be especially careful with because they also had non-technical meanings, and if someone wasn't aware of that, they could get the wrong idea. That list included words like "server", "mouse" and "window", and I've personally seen grown-up people standing behind imposing desks who got really confused upon hearing these words without the proper context. Eight year-olds who just learned how to read and write can pick up a word processor with way less effort than eight year-olds (and non-technical fifty year-olds) could twenty years ago. They understand, for example, how scrolling works. Teaching people how to use a word processor used to entail explaining things such as "you can keep typing once you're at the end of the page". You needed to say that explicitly because the interface didn't seem to have any way for you to get another sheet of paper once you filled one up. People would write things on a page until they got near the bottom, then proceeded to stare quizzically at the screen wondering how they could get another one -- because that's exactly what they did in real life. I'm not saying that people who grew up with computers don't need to be told what TCP is and what a load balancer does. But they do have an intuitive understanding of things that a non-technical audience from twenty years ago didn't have. Including super basic things that you take for granted now, but it used to be that you couldn't -- that things from the Internet don't show up on your computer instantly, that how quickly they do depends on the quality of a connection, that computers need to be given explicit instructions each time (i.e. they'll always ask if you want to save your work before quitting -- they'll never figure out that you always say yes).

andrewzah 7y ago
I'm not arguing that people aren't better at using computers than the previous generation. I'm arguing they aren't necessarily more -literate-. I'm saying that intuitively understanding UX is different than understanding how a computer works. I don't trust either generation to be competent enough to enact legislation regarding computers.

saagarjha 7y ago

Your definition of “tech literacy” is way skewed. These people are able to use technology to do what they need: they’re tech literate. They can talk with their friends over the internet, create and layout documents, print posters, do research; they’re fluent across multiple devices and platforms; many of them interact with some sort of computer for hours each day. What more do you want them to do? (I’m in the age range you specified, by the way.)

andrewzah 7y ago
My definition involves understanding how computers work to a decent degree outside of basic app usage. Being mechanically efficient at using computers (and by this, I mean being efficient at using carefully- designed apps) does not count in my eyes. If any problem occurs, or if one has to do anything outside of the basic app flow, then people go blank. I operate a car daily, does that make me car literate? I understand mechanically how to operate a car, but if anything out of the ordinary occurs I have no idea what to do. Except to call someone who is actually car literate to fix the problem. Usage does not correlate with literacy. When a problem occurs, I've seen many people not even read the error messages or display basic critical thinking ability. I can't call this tech literacy. > They can talk with their friends over the internet, create and layout documents, print posters, do research This is a testament to programmers and UX designers making easy to use applications, not people being "tech literate".