5 ms·

There's nothing wrong with consumption devices, but they are not computers. You are using a computer if and only if you are programming, otherwise you are using

• ggggtez 5y ago
  But isn't it though? Does someone literate in film need to make movies? Why can't someone be literate in tech without writing html?
• yak_shaver2000 5y ago
  What an odd form of gatekeeping. To what end?
  • qsort 5y ago
    I am specifically not attempting to 'gate-keep'. You don't want to code? Don't. I'm not going to force it down your throat.
    • AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      You're gatekeeping who qualifies as "using a computer", and using a really odd definition to do it. Now, the rest of your point is, who cares? Do with that thing whatever floats your boat, it's fine if you don't program. That point is valid. But when "that thing" is a computer, and they're "doing" something with it, that qualifies as "using a computer". At least by the definitions the rest of us are using.
      • qsort 5y ago
        That's just a debate on the semantics of the sentence "using a computer". Maybe your definition is better, I don't particularly care. The point I'm trying to make is that I percieve a very clear conceptual difference between "using a computer to program" and "using a computer to do other things", and I would tend to believe an effort to improve computer literacy should attempt to point people to the former rather than the latter. Do you believe those things to be the same? I have a strong intuition that they aren't, but I'm very willing to hear a counterpoint. Once again, I'm specifically trying to avoid any kind of value judgment.
        • ghaff 5y ago
          My counterpoint to >I would tend to believe an effort to improve computer literacy should attempt to point people to the former rather than the latter. is why? I mean sure. If they want to become programmers, then they need to learn how to use a computer to program but I'm not sure why that's any more about "computer literacy" than lots of other tasks. I use computers for lots of things on a day to day basis, including many "creative" tasks, and almost none of those involve programming. Programming is a specific way that you can use a computer and it may imply deeper knowledge of the underlying system than making a video, but so what? For that matter I could equally argue that a pure front-end developer isn't really computer literate because they maybe don't understand kernel schedulers, security model, processes, interrupts, etc. work. Oh, and how about TLBs, cache eviction policies, dynamic resource allocation, etc. at the CPU level?
          • qsort 5y ago
            Because that's the fundamental, distinctive, unique thing about computers. That's the reason we bother with computers in the first place. There's certainly nothing wrong with using a computer for other stuff, also. Or even exclusively, not everyone needs to be a programmer, that's for sure. I would argue, however, that algorithmic thinking/basic scripting is a very important piece of human knowledge, is it really more esoteric than Latin or Greek, which are routinely taught to high-school students? > For that matter I could equally argue that a pure front-end developer isn't really computer literate... There are different levels of literacy. A 7-year old and a PhD in English literature are both literate, but not at the same level. Same goes for computer-related knowledge, it's a bottomless pit, like any other interesting field.
• xboxnolifes 5y ago
  > You are using a computer if and only if you are programming Maybe my definition of programming is quite narrow, but I wouldn't consider using CAD software, spreadsheets, or (physics, space, etc) simulation software as programming, yet I would consider the ability to use them a degree of computing or tech literacy. I would certainly consider them very far from only being a consumption device.
  • qsort 5y ago
    How many people are at the intersection of (a) being able to competently use CAD software or specialized software for physics or engineering and (b) being unable to write a simple script? Literacy isn't about reading all the time, it's about being able to read if you want/need to. Same with computer literacy.
    • jpindar 5y ago
      Essentially all the older non-software (i.e. electronic, mechanical, aerospace) engineers I know.
  • temac 5y ago
    The thing is that computers are useful for so many things that I find even just attempting to define what is "tech literacy" difficult and bound to endless discussion, and well the result is this blog post and the following debate here. It's like you would like to claim "desktop literacy" for the noble tasks that can be performed on a (e.g. wooden) desktop, traditionally it being let's say copying evangelical scriptures, and are angry against those ignorant young folks that don't give a fuck about the bible but find writing novels cool, and let's not even talk about the peasants that merely use their "desktops" to cook and eat (and in the background you have a pen maker who listens to the copyist rant, with a small smirk) At this point the vague "tech literacy" term is not useful anymore, and the problem is just that more precise terminology is needed to communicate efficiently.
  • eurasiantiger 5y ago
    All of those are heavily algorithmic in nature, so understanding algorithmic complexity makes it easier to understand how and why the software handles the way it does. For example, joining together many separate 3D objects is extremely slow if one just selects all and does an union, since the algorithm needs to check all pairs of objects for overlaps in 3D space. That may not be immediately apparent to non-programmers, but to programmers, it will feel like an intuitive consequence of the problem and the inevitabilities of its solution.
• moshmosh 5y ago
  > There's nothing wrong with consumption devices, but they are not computers. You are using a computer if and only if you are programming, otherwise you are using a glorified television or a glorified typewriter. Looks at all the creation-related tools on his iPad and iPhone, none of which involve programming You sure about that?
• _jal 5y ago
  That's.... a bizarre frame I don't think I've ever heard before. Does this mean that my laptop undergoes some sort of miraculous transformation when I type :wq and open my browser? What if I'm watching video in the background while coding - does my laptop then enter some superposition-state?
  • qsort 5y ago
    I don't see how this is strange, I think I failed to explain myself. The defining feature of books is that you can read them, and books are useful because they have that property. You are literate if and only if you can read a book, regardless of whether you are reading a book at the moment. The defining feature of computers is that they are arbitrarily programmable machines, and computers are useful because they have that property. You are computer-literate if and only if you can program a computer, regardless of whether you are programming a computer at the moment.
    • ghaff 5y ago
      A book is more or less only useful for reading. Well I suppose I can stack some books if I want to elevate something on my desk but pretty much. Whereas a computer can do many different things. Yes, it's because it's an arbitrarily programmable machine but if I choose to use software written by others rather than programming it myself I'm not sure why that's a lower use. In fact, I can program but rarely do so. Usually I'm using a computer to do tasks like writing, working on photos, etc. My day to day use is sort of irrelevant to the fact that I can do some programming. So I guess I'm not computer-literate.
    • danShumway 5y ago
      Wait, hold on though. You just jumped from reading to writing. You are literate if you can read an arbitrarily chosen book. You are an author if you can write a book. Similarly, you are computer-literate if you can accomplish tasks in an arbitrarily chosen program and maintain a system. You are a computer-author if you can write a program. We use literacy to describe understanding, not creation. What you're claiming is the equivalent of saying that modern generations can't be book-literate unless they're writing fan-fiction. I would argue tech-literacy means understanding the common language of tech/UX today and being able to use common technology. Someone is tech-literate if they can "read" technology and are comfortable with common interface conventions, terminology, system maintenance, etc... Anyone who sets up a streaming platform using OBS, who manages a community using admin tools on tech platforms, who figures out how to tune games that they're playing to accommodate recording without dropping frames or de-syncing audio, who sets up microphones and figures out how to balance audio using mixers, who edits the result and uploads it to Youtube -- they would fall very squarely into that category of literacy. They clearly know how to "read" software, even complicated programs like video editing tools.
• eurasiantiger 5y ago
  It is the simulacrum of tech literacy. Just like an Office 365 subscription is a simulacrum of a horde of calculators (people) with mass-produced calculators and typists on mass-produced typewriters, which were simulacra of noblemen scholars, pens (mass-produced simulacra of quills) and papers (mass-produced simulacra of expensive parchment)… which themselves were simulacra of prehistoric humans making cave paintings. So do you really feel the need to tabulate, calculate and write today?