3 ms·
Wow, so reading the comments it seems like HN is now one of these sites where people just comment on the headline without reading the article. The article spen
by licebmi__at__ 5y ago
Wow, so reading the comments it seems like HN is now one of these sites where people just comment on the headline without reading the article.
The article spends about a third of length on the topic if tech might be good for kids or not, the rest (and the meat) is an argument against "the techies as thought leaders because we live in a tech world", and the idea that tech people are uniquely able to understand the consequences of tech on society just because they built it. Actually when reflecting to that, it's even more ironic that the comments in this tech forum fail to address the point and even the top comment talks about the author "inferiority complex".
- ryder9 5y ago
- xyzzy21 5y agoWell, I'd argue tech people have a unique perspective on tech: we've used it the longest and understand it better than most people. I for one have a fundamental creed from using the internet since the 1980s and computers since the 1970s: 99% of a all problems best solved without technology and if your first go-to is a technology solution, you are an idiot, a shitty engineer and questionable as a solution creator. Why? Because I've seen technologies come and go all bleating the same promises that are never kept. And if you truly examine the problems they are trying to address, you see most of the time that the question is wrong or the answer is ill-posed. Most peoples are solvable by communication between humans in a negotiated fashion. These are also the cheapest and fastest solutions. The details of what negotiation means are pretty wide open, but still technology should NEVER be your first, second, third or fifth solution proposal!
- CRConrad 5y ago> but still technology should NEVER be your first, second, third or fifth solution proposal! So always the fourth, then?