Posted by
michael
on from the montessori-school dept.
suzipaw writes "In this interview on OpenP2P.com, Kay has some interesting observations about both the past and future of computing--including kids using technology. Says Kay, "Montessori would have been a great innovator with computers.""
My kid loves her computer
by
Voltronalpha
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
My child loves her computer; she is 3 1/2 and uses it for 2-3 hours everyday. It has replaced the time in her day where she would usually sit and watch a Disney movie or some other such, now she is challenging her mind instead of taking backseat. Kids and computers do mix.
On the plus side at preschool there are two computers that the kids use/watch other kids use, exposure seems to be key.
-- There is evidence to prove both Democrats and Republicans are lying cocksuckers. Vote independently.
Re:My kid loves her computer
by
Flabby+Boohoo
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
2-3 hours is a huge amount of time... I honestly cannot see how that would be good for her.
I have two boys (5 and 7), and I encourage them to go outside and play, play with Lego building blocks (not legso:-)).
They each have thier own computer (old laptops) and they do play some games such as Reader Rabbit, etc. But I purposefully limit the amount of time spend in front of it. I just don't see how it can be good for them to sit there for hours.
Re:My kid loves her computer
by
Commutative+Monoid
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
There are several hours in a day, and for a child that isn't even three yet, I can't say that there exists a tremendous quantity of things for them to be doing to fill their time. Simply being outside for an extra two hours or so isn't going to make a tremendous difference in their capacity to kick or run, and in reality I see most small children spending much of their free time watching television.
The grandparent poster indicated that their child replaced Disney films with computer use, something that stresses literacy, over something that mostly involves vegetation. You may disagree with their assessment about the benefits of computer use over Disney films, but you've no particular reason or grounding to judge another person's parenting by in this, and it's rather rude to posit there's something harmful about the previously mentioned usage, simply because you do not see a reason for it with regard to your children.
Don't assume that because his child spends an aggregate two hours or so using a computer, that that is the extent of her day.
-- You have exactly 314 seconds to come up with a less retarded plot.
Kids and Computers
by
1nsane0ne
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I've taught computer classes to kids before (ages 5 - 14 ) and it is amazing what some of them can do. It's neat to see which ones are confident enough to tinker with things and don't fear making mistakes, the same qualities many/.'ers had in their formative years I'm sure. By sitting in a lab with a few kids and doing something like blocking their favorite website, 9 times out of 10 the kids that go and find away around whatever you did are the ones that relate best to other people and kids. A little bit different then the older stereotypical geek I suppose. Back to the article, I think that besides the internet there has been no real boom in the computer reveloution during my lifetime at least, but then again I'm young and the lowest end machine I got to tinker with was a 286. I'm sure those of you who still have their commie 64's around have some other examples, but quite frankly, I missed all those. The way I see it the computer revolution has been a slow and steady battle with little booms along the way.
Re:Kids and Computers
by
iq+in+binary
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Being someone who had to completely re-build his social skills due to computer use, I am torn between agreeing and disagreeing.
I used to get the crap kicked out of me every day (literally) by kids who saw me as a threat due to my intelligence. I stopped this by withdrawing completely from any personal social interaction.
Time eventually came where I "re-introduced" myself to the world. The fact I had been a social recluse for the past 3 years gave me a whole new spin on life once I actively sought one. I wholely believe this is for the better. Having been a social recluse for so long made real social interaction a learning experience for me.
Due to that, I'm now one of the most popular people in my area. This isn't even intentional. More than likely, it is due to the extreme change in environment and need to acclimate myself.
Tough situations are much better learning and cementing tools than people realize. Had I not shut myself off for awhile in my pubescant years, I'd probably just another wasted youth in America's ghetto.
Children aren't meant to handle social situations as well as adults can. Sometimes taking them out of the social situation for a small while is the best thing to do, considering how much they'll actually learn once put back in the situation.
-- Of all the Universal Constants, here's one I know: Nice guys finish last;)
Re:Kids and Computers
by
rf0
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
When kids are old enough yes then I can see IM being reasonable as a form of communication. As for the mobile least the kids were talking. What I'm more concerened about is when kids are very young. They aren't going to use IM/IRC and I wouldn't let my kids over fears of security.
Its the 5 years old I worry about and would make to sure any kids I have will goto kindergarden so they at least learn what is socailly acceptable
Re:Kids and Computers
by
frankthechicken
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
9 times out of 10 the kids that go and find away around whatever you did are the ones that relate best to other people and kids
I find it best to differentiate between kids and real people as well.
I seem to remember that the most socializing I did as a kid with regards to computing was the illicit trade of copied C64 games tapes. Apart from the actual gaming, everything else seemed to be a largely solitary pursuit, probably as the home revolution was still in its infancy. I'm not sure, but I feel that revolution was when printers became cheap, and suddenly there was an actual practical use, rather than just the perception of it being a rather expensive toy.
Kids and Computers
by
rf0
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
To survive in todays world I agree that kids need to be able to use computers but one thing that concerns me is that an increasing number of people are seeing the computer as an alternative to having human interaction. I've seen a few kids who are 4/5 and have no idea about how to interact socially. There more than quite and shy they are withdrawn.
There should be a balance and I would think that it would be better to spend time with parents that technology. Just call me old fashioned it you want
Kids need to teach us about computers!
by
mabhatter654
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Kids are remarkably adaptable, but they lack the handling of highly complicated verbage structures. i.e. most kids can build complex things with blocks and lego bricks, but can't handle the abstract reading, writing required for most comupter languages. As adult programmers we should work to fix that--it will also benifit other older people as well. Kids are resilliant and love to play. That could be used to create all sorts of interfaces and study the effect on the kids-and the kids effect on the interfaces.
after all these years why are we still programming with text files? there are so many other possibilities. Not everything needs to be on a screen! We could use Blocks, music, colors, lights, shapes--with today's tech the possibilities are endless!
Re:Refelctions...
by
FunkyRat
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm not sure whether you are trying to troll or if you're just a little igonorant about the history of the computer.
Back in the early 1970s, GUIs were not a natural evolution for computers. They only appear so in retrospect because Steve Jobs happened to get a tour of Xerox PARC and decided that GUIs should be the next step in the evolution of computers. I daresay that Jobs (and Woz's) experiences growing up playing (and later writing) video games influenced the decision to base the Lisa and then the Mac's OS around a GUI but had Jobs not had his little tour about PARC it's arguable that the PC revolution would never have happened and the CLI would still be dominant today.
Alan Kay and his fellow researchers at Xerox PARC and preceeded by Doug Englebart at SRI are the real thing - true visionaries. It's easy to knock their accomplishments 35+ years out (Englebart et. al. developed NLS in 1967!) because we've had that long for their ideas to percolate into mass culture. Yeah, I know, the Mac has only been with us since 1984 but really, Englebart and later Kay were subtly but powerfully through their work and demonstrations preparing the way for the dominance of the GUI. Also, as I made allusion to before, don't forget the powerful role that video games had in preparing the kids of the 70s and 80s in ways that would make GUIs seem second nature.
So yeah, I've got to agree, this interview was pretty weak. However, if you want to see where Kay really envisioned that we'd be right now, take a look at the copious information out there regarding Dynabook, Smalltalk and his work at Xerox PARC. Then take a swing by squeak.org, download a copy and play around with it for a while. It's hard not to be impressed. As far as where we go next, that's up to all of us, including you. Personally, I'd like to start working in some strong AI and humaniform robots, but that's my hangup. Perhaps you have a different destination in mind.
Note: I'm not sure of Steve Jobs actual role at Xerox PARC. I've read differing accounts ranging from the tourist picture I paint above to his actually being a researcher there. Can anybody clarify?
And mine are on the street if they learn PHP at any point... Although, actually, children learn to talk before they learn to draw, so why should mastering computer language come 12 years after mastering point and click? Or, conversely, why are GUIs so shallow?
The GUIs we have now generally have the grammatical sophistication of a 2 year-old: "Want THAT, Don't want THAT, move THAT, and THAT, and THAT..." Seeing Kay's name go past again makes me nostalgic for an age when interface designers dreamed bold dreams, when object-oriented meant more than another way of managing libraries, when we really thought that GUIs could become languages rather than cave paintings revisited. I remember playing with GUI code on a Symbolics 15 years ago that still makes any modern GUI seem incredibly limited, and this despite having 100 times the processing power we had then.
I think we settled for a parody of the original dream.
Speaking as someone who has developed RSI from working on computers, I would suggest those of you who have kids that use computers at an early age that you both limit their time spent on the machines and have them sit, use the keyboard and mouse/track ball properly.
If not, they will develop habits that will be difficult to break once they get into their early-to-mid 20s--then they'll be in trouble. Have them develop good habits to start with.
its just a part of evolution
by
Rooked_One
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As the human species progress over the course of time, without destroying itself, it will inherently gain many qualities. One of which is, since we've developed many ways to aid in our progress, to make machines that will aid in our progress. To think otherwise is insane - do you know anyone that would have taken Pi to the extent pc's have? I thought not.
As computers become more common place humans will evolve further. We will no longer have to invest in hard core brain power, and perhaps will concentrate on a different role. If you disagree with darwinism please disregard this post entirely, I don't want to say anything but my opinion. As computers start to do some things for us we will learn how to do other things we couldn't imagine of doing right now. The question is - will we get there without losing sight of what is really important?
If I lost you, I apologize in advance - mod this down all you want:)
Re:Doesn't do much for me
by
Commutative+Monoid
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If I had to make an equally offensive and presumptious statement, it would be that you're using a formulaic means of "whoring" kharma. Your comment is all criticism about the intent of the article and the self-opinion of their subject, with no real substance. Pfffft.
The article is indeed a promotion. It's telling you:
1. Who Alan Kay is, and what he's helped contribute.
2. That he's giving a talk at an O'Reilly function.
3. A general idea of what the talk will be about.
4. A few of the reasons Kay feels we shouldn't become complacent and accept the failings of our current computing world, and why he believes we have ended up with this.
5. It talks a bit about the topic of educating children, where the author reminisces about a previous presentation of Kay's that he witnessed.
6. It mentions Squeak's progression and involvement in education.
Overall the article does an alright job of outlining what you can expect from Kay's actual keynote address, why you might listen to him, and some of the things that he's done and is doing. If you want more, see him speak. If you have complaints about the actual article, they would be with the author and not with Kay, and if anyone is out of place with their arrogance, it would be you and not Alan Kay. He's contributed far more than you, and he's not sitting around deriding you on message boards, telling you how much your comments are a waste of disk space and a contentless mechanism for promoting web hosting services.
-- You have exactly 314 seconds to come up with a less retarded plot.
Re:Kids Sholdnt use the Internet.
by
Commutative+Monoid
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Or they could try being a parent. I don't know, maybe periodically keep tabs on what they're children are doing. I know it's a fairly outlandish theory in this modern day of ours, what with television being the typical mother and father these days.
-- You have exactly 314 seconds to come up with a less retarded plot.
Slashdot Mirror
My child loves her computer; she is 3 1/2 and uses it for 2-3 hours everyday. It has replaced the time in her day where she would usually sit and watch a Disney movie or some other such, now she is challenging her mind instead of taking backseat. Kids and computers do mix.
On the plus side at preschool there are two computers that the kids use/watch other kids use, exposure seems to be key.
There is evidence to prove both Democrats and Republicans are lying cocksuckers. Vote independently.
I've taught computer classes to kids before (ages 5 - 14 ) and it is amazing what some of them can do. It's neat to see which ones are confident enough to tinker with things and don't fear making mistakes, the same qualities many /.'ers had in their formative years I'm sure. By sitting in a lab with a few kids and doing something like blocking their favorite website, 9 times out of 10 the kids that go and find away around whatever you did are the ones that relate best to other people and kids. A little bit different then the older stereotypical geek I suppose. Back to the article, I think that besides the internet there has been no real boom in the computer reveloution during my lifetime at least, but then again I'm young and the lowest end machine I got to tinker with was a 286. I'm sure those of you who still have their commie 64's around have some other examples, but quite frankly, I missed all those. The way I see it the computer revolution has been a slow and steady battle with little booms along the way.
Check out my life
To survive in todays world I agree that kids need to be able to use computers but one thing that concerns me is that an increasing number of people are seeing the computer as an alternative to having human interaction. I've seen a few kids who are 4/5 and have no idea about how to interact socially. There more than quite and shy they are withdrawn.
There should be a balance and I would think that it would be better to spend time with parents that technology. Just call me old fashioned it you want
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
after all these years why are we still programming with text files? there are so many other possibilities. Not everything needs to be on a screen! We could use Blocks, music, colors, lights, shapes--with today's tech the possibilities are endless!
I'm not sure whether you are trying to troll or if you're just a little igonorant about the history of the computer.
Back in the early 1970s, GUIs were not a natural evolution for computers. They only appear so in retrospect because Steve Jobs happened to get a tour of Xerox PARC and decided that GUIs should be the next step in the evolution of computers. I daresay that Jobs (and Woz's) experiences growing up playing (and later writing) video games influenced the decision to base the Lisa and then the Mac's OS around a GUI but had Jobs not had his little tour about PARC it's arguable that the PC revolution would never have happened and the CLI would still be dominant today.
Alan Kay and his fellow researchers at Xerox PARC and preceeded by Doug Englebart at SRI are the real thing - true visionaries. It's easy to knock their accomplishments 35+ years out (Englebart et. al. developed NLS in 1967! ) because we've had that long for their ideas to percolate into mass culture. Yeah, I know, the Mac has only been with us since 1984 but really, Englebart and later Kay were subtly but powerfully through their work and demonstrations preparing the way for the dominance of the GUI. Also, as I made allusion to before, don't forget the powerful role that video games had in preparing the kids of the 70s and 80s in ways that would make GUIs seem second nature.
So yeah, I've got to agree, this interview was pretty weak. However, if you want to see where Kay really envisioned that we'd be right now, take a look at the copious information out there regarding Dynabook, Smalltalk and his work at Xerox PARC. Then take a swing by squeak.org, download a copy and play around with it for a while. It's hard not to be impressed. As far as where we go next, that's up to all of us, including you. Personally, I'd like to start working in some strong AI and humaniform robots, but that's my hangup. Perhaps you have a different destination in mind.
Note: I'm not sure of Steve Jobs actual role at Xerox PARC. I've read differing accounts ranging from the tourist picture I paint above to his actually being a researcher there. Can anybody clarify?
And mine are on the street if they learn PHP at any point... Although, actually, children learn to talk before they learn to draw, so why should mastering computer language come 12 years after mastering point and click? Or, conversely, why are GUIs so shallow?
The GUIs we have now generally have the grammatical sophistication of a 2 year-old: "Want THAT, Don't want THAT, move THAT, and THAT, and THAT..." Seeing Kay's name go past again makes me nostalgic for an age when interface designers dreamed bold dreams, when object-oriented meant more than another way of managing libraries, when we really thought that GUIs could become languages rather than cave paintings revisited. I remember playing with GUI code on a Symbolics 15 years ago that still makes any modern GUI seem incredibly limited, and this despite having 100 times the processing power we had then.
I think we settled for a parody of the original dream.
Virtually serving coffee
Speaking as someone who has developed RSI from working on computers, I would suggest those of you who have kids that use computers at an early age that you both limit their time spent on the machines and have them sit, use the keyboard and mouse/track ball properly.
If not, they will develop habits that will be difficult to break once they get into their early-to-mid 20s--then they'll be in trouble. Have them develop good habits to start with.
As computers become more common place humans will evolve further. We will no longer have to invest in hard core brain power, and perhaps will concentrate on a different role. If you disagree with darwinism please disregard this post entirely, I don't want to say anything but my opinion. As computers start to do some things for us we will learn how to do other things we couldn't imagine of doing right now. The question is - will we get there without losing sight of what is really important?
If I lost you, I apologize in advance - mod this down all you want :)
If I had to make an equally offensive and presumptious statement, it would be that you're using a formulaic means of "whoring" kharma. Your comment is all criticism about the intent of the article and the self-opinion of their subject, with no real substance. Pfffft.
The article is indeed a promotion. It's telling you:
1. Who Alan Kay is, and what he's helped contribute.
2. That he's giving a talk at an O'Reilly function.
3. A general idea of what the talk will be about.
4. A few of the reasons Kay feels we shouldn't become complacent and accept the failings of our current computing world, and why he believes we have ended up with this.
5. It talks a bit about the topic of educating children, where the author reminisces about a previous presentation of Kay's that he witnessed. 6. It mentions Squeak's progression and involvement in education.
Overall the article does an alright job of outlining what you can expect from Kay's actual keynote address, why you might listen to him, and some of the things that he's done and is doing. If you want more, see him speak. If you have complaints about the actual article, they would be with the author and not with Kay, and if anyone is out of place with their arrogance, it would be you and not Alan Kay. He's contributed far more than you, and he's not sitting around deriding you on message boards, telling you how much your comments are a waste of disk space and a contentless mechanism for promoting web hosting services.
You have exactly 314 seconds to come up with a less retarded plot.
Or they could try being a parent. I don't know, maybe periodically keep tabs on what they're children are doing. I know it's a fairly outlandish theory in this modern day of ours, what with television being the typical mother and father these days.
You have exactly 314 seconds to come up with a less retarded plot.