3 ms·

I don't disagree that co!outer science is a more powerful perspective to learn, do a fun substitution exercise and replace computer science with building a car.

I don't disagree that co!outer science is a more powerful perspective to learn, do a fun substitution exercise and replace computer science with building a car. We can lament that people just don't appreciate the beauty of the design process or that people who design cars really "get" cars better than everyone else and that the people who manufacture the cars really hold the power, but at the end of the day some people just need to know how to drive them. In my analogy, there are way too many people taking the "public transportation" route; teach em to drive.

edent 13y ago
Yay! A car analogy :-) I don't know where you're based, but in the UK learning to drive includes a moderately hard theory test. So, you do learn about stopping distances, why you should indicate, simple car maintenance etc. Anyone can learn the basic mechanics of driving (right pedal go fast, left pedal for changing gears, turny thing to change direction) - but we should teach so much more than that.
- hueving 13y ago
  That theory test is still all about operations and basic maintenance. They don't cover fundamental engineering points like crumple zones, valve timing algorithms, or the metallurgy of the engine components.