Berners-Lee Says Internet Will Make Kids Creative

ErikPeterson submitted a story where Tim Berners-Lee (if you need explanation, you're reading the wrong site) is interviewed about how on-line life will make our children more creative than us. He makes various points and predictions about what the internet will do.

Comments

I hope for better global culture understanding!

[garcia]

BERNERS-LEE: The creativity of our children. In many ways, people growing up with the Web and now the Semantic Web take the power at their fingertips for granted. The people who designed the tools that make the Net run had their own ideas for the future. I look forward to seeing what the next generation does with these tools that we could not have foreseen. ...

I guess it will depend per person but I find that reading novels, poetry, and other "classic" lit is what causes ME to be more creative. Yes, that stuff is available online but we all know how cumbersome and uncomfortable it can be to read a novel on a screen.

I believe the Internet will lead to more better global understanding and knowledge (it already has). It will lead to better news reporting to compete with those that read from multiple news sources and have a better understanding of the truth so that sensationalism and out and out lies will likely decrease. Finally, I hope that through this global awareness, political pressure for values and family-first as well as "Great Firewalls" will end as governments (and those that run them) grow to understand and embrace the openness of the world.

Wishful thinking, especially when I believed that MY generation would understand these things and stop things like super right-winged conservative "family values" being pushed through the government. Instead, I am watching as people in America are growing up to want less and less freedom.

I am still hopeful as we didn't grow up 100% immersed in the Internet from birth.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[garcia]

I don't think we need (or want) a governing body to tell us what we can or can't do on the internet.

Exactly my point. I said that we need governments that understand and embrace global cultures -- including the Internet.

We do NOT want governments that attempt to embrace isolationist practices with "Great Firewalls" and family values legislation.

We want to foster global understanding in our young people. We need to give the human race the opportunities to learn as they wish including how to avoid content they themselves might find objectionable -- not what the ruling parties do.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[garcia]

Amazing that no matter what the topic, from pickled beets to the Internet's historic effect on children going back 15 years, you idiots can manage to bring Neocons into the topic.

It's amazing to me that people will immediately believe that I'm talking about GWB when I speak of "family values". Just another FYI, I'm not. I'm talking about ALL politicians trying to ride the conservative family values bandwagon. They include multiple left-wingers including Hilliary and Mrs. Gore.

In order to promote and increase the freedoms that we so pleasantly enjoyed since our country's inception we need to foster an environment that our children can continue to respect.

Currently, any dissenting opinions are looked down upon negatively (see your post above). For once THINK OF THE CHILDREN ;)

Freedoms are slipping away and people like it. It's not appropriate (on any part of the political spectrum) and it's certainly not something a Slashdot troll should support.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[garcia]

Actually, a majority of Americans do want just this thing. Deal with it.

The majority of Americans are uneducated and passive sheep. As long as their Cable TV is there and they can "relax" and live out their worthless lives through people on Reality TV they are fine.

I am not. I am at least speaking out (true, I don't have a huge voice) against what I believe is wrong w/this country. I feel that everyone around me should be educated as to my personal opinions on the injustices of the world including the loss of freedoms America is suffering all in the name of Terrorism and Family Values.

I refuse to "deal with it" and instead I will continue to speak to everyone here, there, and everywhere. They may not agree 100% with what I say but there is always a small chance that someone might rethink what they are doing and finally understand that what they are supporting is NOT the best for our country.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[Irish_Samurai]

I am not. I am at least speaking out (true, I don't have a huge voice) against what I believe is wrong w/this country.

Rock on Brother! This is what America NEEDS to start doing, opening honest and non malicious dialog about our perspectives. I don't have to agree with everything you say, and you don't have to agree with everything I say, but the goal isn't to create converts. It's to gain a more complete and beneficial understanding of a subject. Such a dialog between two educated (or open minded) people, with opposing viewpoints, often ends with both parties revising their perspective to reflect the newly aquired information.

Unfortunately, this process breaks down because people either lack the esteem (or facts) needed to withstand criticism of their argument, or their motivations are not to reach greater understanding between disparate opinions - it is to create converts. This in turn creates a social climate where it is common practice to superficially accept the perpectives that are presented to you the "loudest". Those who lack the skills or motivation to create their own substantiated opinions are co opted by those with strong debate skills or seemingly fact based arguments. When one of these people is confronted with an opposing fact based argument, they revert to rehashing the argument that converted them in a weak attempt to feign educated debate. This does nothing, one side of the equation is only trying to create another convert. Since they really don't understand their own opinion, being that it was given to them, how can they discuss the intrinsics of it?

I salute your steadfastness in speaking your mind. Few people undersand the stamina needed to maintain composure when constantly assaulted with self supposed statements such as: "Actually, a majority of Americans do want just this thing. Deal with it."

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[Shaper_pmp]

Not necessarily.

True, the web provide a much more fertile ground for rumours, gossip and flash-mobs of all kinds, but this is only a side-effect - the internet it primarily good for propagating memes.

All memes are spread more easily via the web than ever before, which does mean we get more rumours and gossip-presented-as-fact (bad). However, it also means we get more news, grass-roots activism, whistle-blowers and whack-a-mole style propagation of information certain entities (corporations, governments, etc) would rather keep under wraps (very, very, very good).

The problem is many people are still too credulous and inexperienced with this sudden explosion of information they encounter, and haven't developed defence mechanisms yet. This can be easily demonstrated when people first get access - initially they're clueless, naive and obey anything that looks like an instruction ("Click here to stop spyware! Warning: New Virus melts your hard-drive and explodes your toes - forward to everyone you know! Stop $$$pam fast!"). After a few weeks (or family-members beating them about the head and neck) they learn to be more discriminating - they don't forward hoax virus alerts, don't buy stuff from spam, and don't click on irritating advert images that look like Windows dialog boxes.

In the same way "bad" mechanisms have developed to take advantage of this new meme-carrying capacity (spammers, virus hoaxes, etc), we're also starting to see society-level defences and counter-memes against them evolving too - snopes.com, spam/popup filters, the idea you should never buy anything from spam, etc.

The population's information-landscape has changed beyond recognition in (for most of them) less than decade, and it's taking time for them to catch up, that's all.

Of course, along with this incredible boon of information and opportunity there's the concomitant risk - people only reading things which confirm their existing opinions and prejudices. This ultimately leads to groups with different perceptions of reality - "Iraq is nearly over and Bush is the saviour of the US" vs "Bush has fucked the country and Iraq is worse than Vietnam", for example. Communication becomes very difficult between both groups since there's a smaller and smaller amount of common understanding between them, and without some shared values to start from agreement on anything is highly unlikely.

We're starting to see the effects of this with the ongoing culture war (don't flame me, I didn't coin the term) in the US - it's all too easy for people to only read left-wing blogs, or to watch Fox news and believe everything, simply because it makes them feel better than being exposed to other, outside viewpoints.

However, this is a choice for the individual - do you seek out and test alternative viewpoints, thereby testing your own, or do you only stick with sources that agree with you, sinking into intellectual masturbation?

The technology's just there - it's up to us how we use it.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[Reality Master 101]

They may not agree 100% with what I say but there is always a small chance that someone might rethink what they are doing and finally understand that what they are supporting is NOT the best for our country.

I wonder if you actually listen to what other people have to say, and are willing to rethink what YOU believe. And that maybe what you are supporting is not the best for the country. Somehow, I doubt it (though, I doubt you'll admit that).

To be honest, I've stopped arguing with people like you, because you /want/ to believe that freedom is getting squashed, despite all evidence to the contrary. Tou say you want to "educate" (how arrogant is that?) the people around you, but perhaps you should be willing to be educated first.

What the internet will do ?

[[ella]]

It won't do anything. The question is: What will we do with (or should I use 'to'?) it ?

Re:You want a hyphen?

[ShieldW0lf]

The internet will reduce the value of a good long-term memory significantly, because you can always look things up, and it will increase the value of being a quick study dramatically. Those who can learn a new task on demand via the internet, use it, and move on to something new will be more successful than those who need to spend a long time learning. Specialization will become a lot less common, but will be a lot more valuable for those areas where it exists and is necessary.

Summary title is misleading

[hcdejong]

From TFA: The creativity of our children. In many ways, people growing up with the Web and now the Semantic Web take the power at their fingertips for granted. The people who designed the tools that make the Net run had their own ideas for the future. I look forward to seeing what the next generation does with these tools that we could not have foreseen. ...

I suspect he didn't mean to say that our children will be more creative than we are. Just that we can't foresee what new applications will be developed, and how all that information will be used.

'making kids creative' would be hugely optimistic given what's currently happening on the internet, with most people's publications being either mundane or regurgitation. I suspect most activity on the internet is passive consumption rather than creative.

Re:Well let's educate just in case

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you. This is what I hate about Slashdot: there is an assumption that we know every name and acronym there is referring to technology. Would it kill anyone to put some context in the summary?

No

[hsmith]

What makes children creative is getting outside and building forts out of anything they can find. It is playing cops and robbers, cowboys and indians. It is riding a bike, playing in woods, meeting friends in real life. It is reading the book and figuring out in your head what the characters look like, what hte landscape looks like. It isn't watching a movie or watching a slideshow on the internet.

The internet is fun, don't get me wrong. But it isn't helping people become more interactive and creative. it is a tool to do work, it is a tool to communicate. it isn't a new friend.

Re:No

[Red Flayer]

"The internet is fun, don't get me wrong. But it isn't helping people become more interactive and creative. it is a tool to do work, it is a tool to communicate."

Yes, it is a tool to communicate. It allows a much wider source of contacts with whom to communicate with. This can stimulate creativity that the activities you mention cannot.

The internet also offers myriad ways for kids to express themselves, to formulate new indeas, and to try them out with their peers. Watching slideshows and movies is far from the only content available on the Web.

Anecdotally, I was interested in a ton of subjects that none of my firends or family members were knowledgeable about. My info source: the library. Not convenient at all (did not go to often, and too far to ride the bike too). Plus, most of the library resources were WAY over my head when I was 10. The internet would have allowed me to explore those subjects easily.

Do I think that the internet should replace traditional socialization? No way in hell. But does it stimulate creativity in ways that traditional socialization does not? You betcha.

Re:No

[slackerboy]

I think there's some confusion about the difference between creativity and knowledge. Sure, knowledge is useful when you're trying to be creative, but it's not the same thing.

In general, the internet provides a lot of knowledge (some of it even accurate), but whether that translates to increased creativity is debatable.

In fact, some could argue that the increased availability of knowledge actually limits creativity. ("Why do I ned to come up a with a way to do that? Here's six different ways I found on the internet.")

Obvious

[JWW]

Isn't this kind of obvious....

Father of world wide web says that the world wide web is good for children!

What else is he going to say? I mean I agree with him, but he isn't exactly an impartial observer.

Libraries & creativity

[jurt1235]

This argument of the web making kids more creative is I think faulty. The reasoning:
Smart & creative kids use the current environment of social structure to get to the information they want, or the tools they want. A library is one of those tools. The internet only makes it easier to access a lot more less structures information.
What the net probably does, is make it less boring for some kids, and thus giving more creative but without the internet easily bored kids a chance to show their creativity.
Boredom and attentionspan problems will however also take their toll on the internet, so to predict a more creative generation is not justifiable.

Time will tell.

No why/how, just that he looks forward to it

[ScentCone]

Tim basically just states that since we're using his baby in ways he coldn't have foreseen, that certainly all the new stuff we'll see in the next 10 years will come as a surprise, too.

Well, Tim... duh! But I actually have a bone to pick with the way the post spins his comment. The web isn't going to make kids more creative. Perhaps it will allow natively creative kids to draw on more information and savor the exposure to a wider world... but that's only useful if creativity, as a hardwired personality trait, and as a parent-nurtured habit/way-of-life is actually present.

It's more likely that some creative children will leverage all of this great connectivity to grow up and make cool things happen, and that many more other children will leverage all of this great connectivity by sitting on their couches passively consuming that which the first group creates. Is there anything about humanity's adoption of any evolving communication medium that suggests otherwise? The availability of printing presses didn't turn everyone into authors, and the availability of cheap home video gear didn't turn everyone into creative filmmakers. And the availability of low-brow blogging and site authoring tools sure as hell hasn't made most kids any more creative - just noisier.

I am looking forward to how really creative people continue to push the technology in unexpected directions. But I know better than to think that the creative/potato ratio will change in any meaningful way, Semantic Web or not, Tim.

Re:Presentation

[Alex P Keaton in da]

On the internet and creativity thing- I will play devil's advocate- What about situations where instead of having to figure out on their own what something is/does/means, a kid can just look it up on the internet? What does that do for creativity?
Please, please explain something to me about these hyphenated names. I live in the midwest, so we don't see much of this silliness. But please indulge me:
Lets says an offspring or Berners-Lee marries an offspring of another hypenated name family, let's call them Smith-Jones. Would the last name of their children be Smith-Jones-Berners-Lee? This could of course go on forever, until names are so long that we would need smaller fonts or wider paper. Seriously. Ridiculous.
How do you figure our whose name goes first? By height? Alphabetically?
And also, I believe that anything that increases your kids chance of getting the shit kicked out of him on the playground, whether it is giving him a ridiculous first name, or a hyphenated last name, is cruel. On the other hand, maybe if I have more coffee, I will stop acting like such an asshole.

Opinion

[danheskett]

Jeez, one thing I notice is that the Internet has caused everyone - including children/young people - to think that just because they have an uninformed or slightly informed opinion on something they ought to (1) argue it blindly (2) shout about it indefinately and (3) brow-beat those who disagree. Livejournal et all are just bastions of uninformed, or slightly informed opinion. There was a time in discourse - political or otherwise - when it was acceptable to say "I have no opinion on the matter". Now it seems like if you haven't got a deeply rooted opinion on a topic within 5 minutes of it happening you are doing a grave disservice to the world. There was a time when I had a blog (well, before it was called that) and I ended it after a few years beacuse I was tired of people e-mailing me demanding to know what I wasn't "covering" a specific topic.

Re:Opinion

[hellomynameisclinton]

People have been behaving poorly like you describe for eons. This intraweb thing just makes it possible to see more of it than you would have before.

If your point is that there's an odd distribution of personalities online, and it doesn't quite mirror the ditribution in the world, then I agree completely. The nerds and pr0nofiles got here first, but history is showing that it only takes time for the online world to become more representative of the real world.

If you are unhappy about all the pontification that happens on the websites you visit, then try other websites! The ONLY thing the web does is connect. If you're unhappy with the connections you've made so far, it's your job to find better or more meaningful connections.

The challenge I pose to you is to not stop exploring the web once you find the site/group/board that you are the most comfortable with. Participate in sites or discussions where you are in the minority. I guarantee you will see something that changes your ideas or perceptions and make you a wiser, more understanding indivudual.

Re:You want a hyphen?

[bogaboga]

Disclaimer:

This applies to my part of the US.

While I agree with you, I will hasten to add that just like what electronic gadgets and lack of focus have done to our kids in school, the heavy dependence on the Internet will help produce pretty confident kids but who cannot deliver in real world environments.

I know because I was a teacher at one time. Today's kids are pretty confident. They go:..."I can do this...I can do that"...mostly as end users. Just see how kids play the PS2s and XBoxes of this world. They are pretty good at this. When more serious problems come up at their places of work, they cannot deliver. Their companies resort to outsourcing. Little wonder that not much in America seems to be done right these days.

Just imagine for a second how we handled the Katrina hurricane after knowing that it was coming, it was big, it was headed for a city below sea level and that thousands could not evacuate. For the 5 or 6 days we had to prepare, shame is what we have to endure now. Generations to come will be embarrassed with this generation.

Re:Presentation

[Uukrul]

Mod parent up.

What do you think is better:

a) Slashdot teenager style:
Tim Berners-Lee (if you need explanation, you're reading the wrong site) is interviewed

b) Profesional looking style:
Tim Berners-Lee is interviewed.

It's your choice.

The Internet

[Anonymous Coward]

This seems to be more pie-in-the-sky. While I can appreciate what Mr. Berners-Lee has done for the Internet (like the WorldWideWeb), these types of predictions are odd to say the least. It's like saying that the Internet will end world hunger or bring peace in the Middle East. You can't eat the Internet! Think of this as the Information Superhighway without the information.

Re:Their grammar MIGHT be better than the poster's

[Anonymous Coward]

Make them "more creative than us"? Don't you mean "more creative than we are"? "Us" is an object pronoun, dude. "We" is the appropriate subject pronoun.

Oh shut up. In real English, "more creative than us" is the standard form used in everyday speech by over 99% of native speakers, and "more creative than we are" is pompous and wordy.

I mean if you're not careful, you'll say stuff like,

I thought grammar nazis were supposed to use the inclusive "stuff such as", which means "stuff similar to and including", rather than the exclusive "stuff like", which means "stuff similar to but excluding"?

Of course that's as nonsensical as the rest of prescriptive grammar, but please, either be a grammar nazi to the core or accept the authority of norma loquendi for everything. Don't flip-flop.

"I like eating cheeseburgers more than her," when you really mean, "I like eating cheeseburgers more than she does." NOT the same, bunky.

No, actually it is the same. Ask anyone on the street what "I like eating cheeseburgers more than her" means, and the vast majority will not think of cannibalism. Sorry, but just because you choose to resolve a minor ambiguity in the ridiculous way doesn't mean that the vast majority of people do not recognise it as a perfectly logical, meaningful, and grammatical utterance that is identical in meaning to your second example.

Next I suppose you'll be telling me to not split infinitives. Or that there are certain words that sentences should not start or end with. Yet more made-up rules that have no basis in usage and no actual function in language.