Comment Between this and the 'alien lifeform' debacle... (Score 1) 610
...I have to ask: doesn't NASA have anything better to do with its time (and our money)?
...I have to ask: doesn't NASA have anything better to do with its time (and our money)?
I wrote for BYTE back in the mid-1980s. Nowadays, if I mention that to most people, they look at me curiously -- probably get the same reaction if I told them I had published articles in Colliers.
And, no, any current incarnation won't be the same as back then, but the personal computing industry has changed massively since then; it's been through at least two crashes (1988-90 and, of course, 2000-2004), and the technology is on a whole different level now -- both the hardware and the system software is less accessible than it was back then. The real barrier, though, is the advertisers. BYTE in the mid-80s sometimes got up to 600 pages per issue total size, because there were so many advertisers willing to chase after its readers. (Cf. the 1988-90 tech crash.) Trying to create an updated version of that BYTE might be possible, but I'm not sure who would advertise in it.
There are already plenty of alternatives to the Mac Apps Store: Amazon, Best Buy, Fry's, and anywhere else you can buy Mac software. As the person says, get a grip.
Variations of this argument date back at least 25 years, when it was it was seriously proposed that the WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointers) interface being popularized by the Macintosh would mentally cripple us, and that we should all stick with command-line interfaces. No, seriously. I strongly suspect a similar argument was made when the automatic transmission was introduced in cars, or the Dewey Decimal system and card catalogs into libraries. ("You should just read all the books and know what's where!")
It was bollocks then, and it's bollocks now. These are enabling technologies -- people get more done. I have 3000 books in 17 bookshelves (the vast majority non-fiction) and have new books from Amazon arrive almost weekly; I read heavily, but I also use Google and other on-line tools heavily.
Technology changes. I should know; it's been 40 years since I wrote my first program (in high school) using a limited form of BASIC by filling in ovals on computer cards. But logic and reasoning change much more slowly and underlie all of information technology. If the kids don't understand logic and reasoning, if they can't analyze and construct it, the rest won't matter.
Some years ago, I acted as an expert witness in a civil case that involved forged pages inserted into the only extant signed copy of a contract. I testified on the stand at length as to all the various evidences that these specific pages had been deliberately changed and had likely been retyped and then printed: they were printed on an ink-jet printer vs. a laser printer for the original pages; there were words misspelled that had been correctly spelled in the most recent electronic version of the document; there were three lines of text completely missing on one of the altered pages, likely due to similar line endings (i.e., the typist looked at the hard copy, typed the text in, then looked back and inadvertently skipped down three lines); and so on.
After I had testified, I was excused from the courtroom along with the alleged forger so that the lawyers could argue some motions before the judge. Out in the hallway, the alleged forger turned to me and said, "Your testimony was very interesting; I learned a lot." I thought, "Oh, great. Now he'll know what to avoid in the future."
...and ask yourself if you'd be surprised by these results. Most home computers (like TVs) are entertainment devices that are occasionally educational, rather than educational devices that are occasionally entertaining.
Beyond that, fundamental education (language, math, reasoning, general and specific knowledge) is hard and involves study, memorization, drill, and test. People have been hoping for 40 years or so that computers would somehow magically make that go away. Or to paraphrase South Park:
1) Computers in classrooms and homes
2) ?
3) Smart, well-educated kids!
Sorry, doesn't work that way.
It's been nearly 25 years since I taught CS (BYU, 1985-87), and I taught at the peak of CS enrollment, so I had large (200+ students) "Intro to Programming" courses; also, these same classes counted as general education. I'm sure a lot of 'sharing' went on as far as the programming assignments went, but I was never concerned, because (a) that's true in real-life programming as well, and (b) it wasn't going to help them (and actually hurt them) when it came to tests. As a side note, enrollment demand was so high at that time that if you wanted to be a CS major, you had to complete this class, apply to the CS department, and be accepted as a CS major. Ah, those were the days.
The other classes I taught (assembly language, data structures, computer and society) were for CS majors only. The first two required programming, and again I wasn't concerned due to the same programming vs. test performance check. I also wasn't concerned because I knew (from personal experience) how tough the upper-division classes were (compiler design, OS implementation, comparative languages, not to mention the lower-division 'algorithms' class taught using Knuth's "Art of Computer Programming: Fundamental Algorithms"), and I knew that if someone cheated their way through the earlier classes, they would crash and burn eventually.
Kicked New England's butt, they did.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion