3 ms·
The definition of mastery in your comment sounds like nonreliance on technology to accomplish [something]. Technologyless Mastery was a natural result from: re
by summarybot 2mo ago
The definition of mastery in your comment sounds like nonreliance on technology to accomplish [something]. Technologyless Mastery was a natural result from: reliance and overreliance on technology being stuttery, unpredictable, inadventitious and costly.
In other words, it made more sense to 'frontload' hardthought and pondering so one was prepared [for whatever may come].
People also thought aqueducts were the best way to move water for thousands of years.
- d_silin 2mo agoI can teach symbolic math effectively using clay tablet and reed pen today. Numerical methods, however, would require at least minimal computing hardware. I think there should be a guiding principle of using the least amount of tech in teaching any subject, just like principle of least privilege in cybersecurity.
- nocoolnametom 2mo agoYou hit on the head something that I've been trying to put into words for a while now: it seems that the benefit of technology to increase learning appears to be a bell-shaped graph where for each combination of subject matter there is a sweet spot where the level of technological assistance becomes helpful but after which it replaces too much of your own internal neuron-connecting processes and inhibits learning.
- summarybot 2mo agoThat's a strong observation. And I'm wondering if humans will adapt; or if the intensity of "heat and light" required to "weld" connections together is non-negotiable.
- goda90 2mo ago> People also thought aqueducts were the best way to move water for thousands of years. They still do because they still are? I'm hard pressed to think of a better way to move water than creating a gently sloped channel(this includes any pipelines that don't use pumps, by the way) for it to follow from where it is to where you need it. Many places that don't have sufficient local groundwater are still supplied by aqueducts to this day. If you have to pump it, then you're paying for the channel and the energy, which is worse than just using gravity.
- summarybot 2mo agoAnd how many aqueducts lead to your dwelling today?
- ang_cire 2mo agoI'm fairly certain that you do in fact have a duct that moves aqua (water) into your house, bro. And gravity-feed systems are the best way to move large amounts of water. That's even how nature works, and nature moves much more water than humans do.
- summarybot 2mo agoYou miss the point entirely little bro. Modern water-moving infrastructure is qualitatively different than two thousand years ago. Why would modern education be exempt from a similar transformation?
- ang_cire 2mo agoThis is a false dichotomy. University impact on careers in the 1980s was materially different than now, and that is still "modern education". Opposing the AI impact on universities is not equivalent to opposing modern water infrastructure, it's more akin to being opposed to a new water pipe material that is shown to improve flow but have adverse health effects.
- goda90 2mo agoI live someplace with abundant groundwater so my water comes from a well less than a mile away. But millions of people have aqueducts leading to their city providing a significant portion of their water supply.
- summarybot 2mo agoAnd when you need water for drinking or showering do you go to the well to get it?