3 ms·

If you've ever seen a 2 year old or, worse, a baby boomer playing with an iPad you'd realize we're basically there. At this point Jeff's car analogy is about ri

by tjmc 14y ago

If you've ever seen a 2 year old or, worse, a baby boomer playing with an iPad you'd realize we're basically there. At this point Jeff's car analogy is about right. Is it useful to know how your car and computer work under the hood? Yes. Is it necessary? Increasingly less so.

robertpateii 14y ago
I'm curious why this was down voted into being grayed out, within 20 minutes of being posted and with no replies to it. edit: seems it got better.
alanh 14y ago
I’m biased (I work here), and we have a way to go, but IFTTT.com is definitely a step in this direction, too.
alecperkins 14y ago
There's an issue with comparisons to plumbing and mechanics. The kinds of devices "ordinary users" interact with in those realms are physical, and it's possible to see how they work at a high level just by looking at them. (Yes, cars and such are getting more and more like moving computers, but the basics haven't changed.) This is not at all the case with computers. They are magical black boxes if you're not familiar with how they work. Understanding even just the ideas of programs manipulating data is important, however abstracted the interface is. And what better way to teach that than with basic programming lessons, even just something like Karel++. Not to mention all of the related concepts of logic and problem solving. More importantly, computers are black boxes made by people. I think a big part of “learning to code” is not just being technologically literate. It's a way to teach an understanding that these devices are doing what someone told them to, and that users have the power to make the computer do what they want. That nearly everything we interact with was designed and built by other people is an incredibly under appreciated fact. Learning how to use tools is empowering, and a fundamental part of being human.
gbog 14y ago
There is this saying from Zhuangzi 2000 years ago: don't let things "thing" you. If we let our kids use iPads without telling then these things are hackable they will become their slave. We are already too much the slaves of our gadgets. I fear that and will show to my kids how to open a washing machine, a computer, how these things work. I will also tell them ho to cooka chicken, how to fix a leaky faucet, etc.
andrewflnr 14y ago
Even cars still break down, and when they do it's very useful, if not necessary, to have an idea of what's going on. At the least, you become harder to rip off when you take it to a professional. Computers and cars themselves, generally, are not necessary, just very useful. An understanding of math or good writing is not necessary in any really strong sense. We can strongly recommend, or even mandate, something that isn't necessary, and often do. I don't see why programming is different, or even less useful. I will continue to recommend it to anyone who's open to it.

by tjmc 14y ago

robertpateii 14y ago

I'm curious why this was down voted into being grayed out, within 20 minutes of being posted and with no replies to it. edit: seems it got better.

alanh 14y ago

I’m biased (I work here), and we have a way to go, but IFTTT.com is definitely a step in this direction, too.

alecperkins 14y ago

There's an issue with comparisons to plumbing and mechanics. The kinds of devices "ordinary users" interact with in those realms are physical, and it's possible to see how they work at a high level just by looking at them. (Yes, cars and such are getting more and more like moving computers, but the basics haven't changed.) This is not at all the case with computers. They are magical black boxes if you're not familiar with how they work. Understanding even just the ideas of programs manipulating data is important, however abstracted the interface is. And what better way to teach that than with basic programming lessons, even just something like Karel++. Not to mention all of the related concepts of logic and problem solving. More importantly, computers are black boxes made by people. I think a big part of “learning to code” is not just being technologically literate. It's a way to teach an understanding that these devices are doing what someone told them to, and that users have the power to make the computer do what they want. That nearly everything we interact with was designed and built by other people is an incredibly under appreciated fact. Learning how to use tools is empowering, and a fundamental part of being human.

gbog 14y ago

There is this saying from Zhuangzi 2000 years ago: don't let things "thing" you. If we let our kids use iPads without telling then these things are hackable they will become their slave. We are already too much the slaves of our gadgets. I fear that and will show to my kids how to open a washing machine, a computer, how these things work. I will also tell them ho to cooka chicken, how to fix a leaky faucet, etc.

andrewflnr 14y ago

Even cars still break down, and when they do it's very useful, if not necessary, to have an idea of what's going on. At the least, you become harder to rip off when you take it to a professional. Computers and cars themselves, generally, are not necessary, just very useful. An understanding of math or good writing is not necessary in any really strong sense. We can strongly recommend, or even mandate, something that isn't necessary, and often do. I don't see why programming is different, or even less useful. I will continue to recommend it to anyone who's open to it.