4 ms·

In other fields we recognize that there is a bifurcation between the knowledge required by practitioners of that field and the base level of understanding from

In other fields we recognize that there is a bifurcation between the knowledge required by practitioners of that field and the base level of understanding from non-practitioners. A 'good driver' isn't expected to know about ignition timing or the stoichiometric ratios of various fuels. For first aid we ask people to learn CPR, not to do '1 hour of surgery'. We expect people to know countries and capitals but not GIS maps. I feel like we haven't drawn the line between user vs creator as clearly in technology. It is accurate to say that more computing knowledge is needed in the general populace. The power of computers/technology is limited by the human operators in most scenarios. But how do we focus on building better operators? Where is our line drawn?

GrinningFool 13y ago
Learning the technology used every day - more specifically and most importantly learning not be afraid to explore that technology - can be done without even touching on programming. It's a lot more akin to learning critical thinking: do not accept that things must be the way they are because you have been told it is so (or because these are the default options presented to you.) But "learn, explore and become comfortable with technology that runs your life" is quite a bit different from "learn to code". I guess to an extent the former qualifies as building better operators - but there seems to be a negative connotation there that I disagree with. You can become a better car operator by learning what all those buttons in your car do. You (and others on the road) benefit from this. As you pointed out, there's little benefit to learning the technical elements of it - while they do affect you, you derive no benefit as an operator of a car from learning them. "I feel like we haven't drawn the line between user vs creator as clearly in technology." I missed this on my first read through, and I think that's a very valid point. My only objection comes back to the negative connotations of being a 'user'. It's always of benefit to learn to be a skilled user of anything you use on a regular basis.

GrinningFool 13y ago

Learning the technology used every day - more specifically and most importantly learning not be afraid to explore that technology - can be done without even touching on programming. It's a lot more akin to learning critical thinking: do not accept that things must be the way they are because you have been told it is so (or because these are the default options presented to you.) But "learn, explore and become comfortable with technology that runs your life" is quite a bit different from "learn to code". I guess to an extent the former qualifies as building better operators - but there seems to be a negative connotation there that I disagree with. You can become a better car operator by learning what all those buttons in your car do. You (and others on the road) benefit from this. As you pointed out, there's little benefit to learning the technical elements of it - while they do affect you, you derive no benefit as an operator of a car from learning them. "I feel like we haven't drawn the line between user vs creator as clearly in technology." I missed this on my first read through, and I think that's a very valid point. My only objection comes back to the negative connotations of being a 'user'. It's always of benefit to learn to be a skilled user of anything you use on a regular basis.