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

Presentation

[Big Nothing]

For those unfamiliar with Tim Berners-Lee, he is the Director of the World Wide Web Consortium.

Re:Presentation

[op12]

And inventor of the World Wide Web.

Re:Presentation

[xtracto]

From tfa:
Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web.

I CALL BULLSHIT!

We all know Al Gore invented teh interweb!

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.

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.

Re:Presentation

[eshefer]

if you don't know what is a Tim Berners-Lee, you are on the wrong medium.

Re:Presentation

[MythoBeast]

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?

Creativity is fueled by the complexity of one's environment. Developmental studies on children are pretty clear on that. The more pieces you have to recombine, the more likely you are to recombine them in original and interesting ways. The internet just allows people to avoid the work behind recombining of things in ways that others have already done so, while still providing the benefit of learning the results.

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

Indulgence granted. When two people with separate names get married and one decides to hyphenate, she generally places the new name at the end of her original surname so as not to disrupt alphabetization. For children, this results in having parents with two distinct and separate last names, and the child generally chooses between them whenever they decide to have a professional life.

Marriage between two people with hyphenated names is generally cause for negotiation. There are no hard rules on whose name gets changed when you get married. Usually the female will drop both of her last names (hyphen included) and take the male's pair. Sometimes she won't bother changing her name at all. I haven't heard of any men taking a woman's hyphenated name, but it does happen for normal names, so it's not impossible. I have heard of couples who just dump the entire mess and invent their own new, legal last name.

So the answer to your question is that it's entirely up to the couple to make it as complicated as they feel appropriate.

Re:Presentation

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks.
Even though most of us know this, its less annoying to skip this link to Wiki than it is to read "if you need explanation, you're reading the wrong site" ubergekk attitude.
Its nice to see soem people keep alive Linux stereotypes such as what complete a-holes some of them are towards newbies. For each geek willing to help on Install Fests, there are dozens who think their too hip for their stool.

Re:Presentation

[PhilHibbs]

I was going to pick a) but now I see that you'd linked to the Spanish Wikipedia article, I am now tempted to say b) - it's a close call but I still think I prefer the story as written.

Re:Presentation

[Paradise Pete]

We all know Al Gore invented teh interweb!

Good one! Say, have you heard about that "All your base" stuff yet? It's a hoot.

And...

[sultanoslack]

And he also predicts that the semantic web will take off Real Soon Now. ;-) (Where real soon is t + 5 years for continuously evaluated t.)

Re:And...

[xao gypsie]

And he also predicts that the semantic web will take off Real Soon Now. ;-) (Where real soon is t + 5 years for continuously evaluated t.) thankfully t and t+5 converge to the same Limit, though I don't know that we (as a human race) will be around for that...

Well let's educate just in case

[Anonymous Coward]

This is who Tim Berners-Lee is.

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!

[CyricZ]

"American" also refers to the ideas espoused by the Founding Fathers of America. Remember, America is built around those certain concepts. To be "American" is to accept ideals such as democracy, fair justice, but most importantly freedom (be it of the press, faith, speech, expression, etc.).

One who supports censorship, and is henceforth against freedom of expression, cannot be considered an American. That is simply because they do not subscribe to American values.

Re:I hope for better global culture understanding!

[Itchy Rich]

To be "American" is to accept ideals such as democracy, fair justice, but most importantly freedom (be it of the press, faith, speech, expression, etc.).

Judging by the decision to send Judith Miller to jail I would've thought a more pragmatic definition would be "resident of the Americas".

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.

Tools?

[b100dian]

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...

#1> Gimie you're IP and Ill hax0r ya rite aw4ay...!
#2> 127.0.0.1
#1 connection reset by peer

Children?

[Spy Handler]

"Online life will produce more creative children"

And also more 40 year old virgins...

At what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems to me it would make them more creative at three things...

1. Finding a way to send IM's to each other at school without the admin noticing.

2. Find ways to get to game/pr0n sites that filters block.

3. Find ways to appear working, while actually not.

An interesting story from #3...
A friend of mine was supposed to be doing some work for history at school, but didn't know that the computers had sound. (his work was in another window) He went to stupidvideos.com, and started to play a clip, but then the computer belted out, "Stupid Videos!" and then the sounds of someone doig something stupid. Thinking fast, he hid the taskbar and switched to the window with his work. The teacher never found out who it was playing the stupidvideos.

Re:At what?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I remember some old Macintosh games where the space bar would pause and pull up a dummy spreadsheet in the game window. It was great feature.

Web effects on memory

[Red Flayer]

"For instance, the Net does not change the number of hours in the day or the number of things you can keep in your head." (emphasis mine)

Sure, it hasn't changed the potential of our memory -- but I would speculate that the internet has decreased the amount of information we do keep in our heads. Because information is so easily available, we need to remember less.

Is this a bad thing? Not as long as the Web is available to us. It probably makes us more effective in general, since we have more info at hand. But if the Web were to fail due to apocalypse or something, I think we'd have some cache-ing up to do.

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.

Big Surprise: Inventor says invention good!

[bigtallmofo]

Who would've thought that the inventor of the World Wide Web would declare it is good for people and society as a whole?

Next up on Slashdot: Authors reviewing their own books!

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

[BladeMelbourne]

I think that the internet helps people explore interactive content that would not otherwise be available, and interact with people from many walks of life, around the world.

As long as personal/face-to-face relationships do not suffer, everything in moderation is OK IMHO.

As a web developer/programmer, spending time online reading/downloading source from other sites allows me to be more creative in chosing the best way to code a requirement.

Re:No

[mikrorechner]

it isn't a new friend.

Ahh! You! hmph... shut up!

/me hugs Internet

Don't listen to him... he's just being mean... you're my BEST friend!

/me looks at hsmith angrily

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.

I disagree.

[CyricZ]

Take a peek at the GameFAQs.com forums. They are frequented by youth and young adults. Notice the terrible grammar, horrible spelling, and the inability of many posters there to post coherent, sensible content. Whether this is caused by a lack of proper education, or whether it is just the nature of message boards, is questionable.

Personally, I would never let my children or grandchildren post at the GameFAQs forums without proper supervision. It's not about protecting them from the content there, but more the presentation of the content. I support creativity, and to be truly expressive requires intelligence and at least the ability to read and write with clarity and correctness.

All a child will learn at GameFAQs is how to type and compose written works very poorly. While the Internet can help children become very creative, it can also lead them to become lazy in their communication habits. Frankly, I'd be adverse to letting a child, or even a teen, post frequently at forums like those at GameFAQs, just because of how their creativity could be negatively affected.

Re:I disagree.

[garcia]

Take a peek at the GameFAQs.com forums. They are frequented by youth and young adults. Notice the terrible grammar, horrible spelling, and the inability of many posters there to post coherent, sensible content. Whether this is caused by a lack of proper education, or whether it is just the nature of message boards, is questionable.

I don't need to go anywhere else. I can look right here on Slashdot. Not only do the various readers of Slashdot (myself included) have spelling and grammar mistakes, the "editors" do as well.

I support creativity, and to be truly expressive requires intelligence and at least the ability to read and write with clarity and correctness.

Are you saying that rap music (full of "foul" language and poor grammar) is not creative? Even though I don't particularly care for that genre, I still respect the artists' creativity.

I'm actually disappointed that you would attempt to forbid a child to read a forum because you disagree with the spelling and grammar content. I don't feel particularly moved to commit spelling and grammar mistakes because others do.

Proper education in the home and at school is what will help to change that behavior. Limiting typing and communications skills is the root of the problem.

I suggest that you PROMOTE discussion forums, chat rooms, etc, as a way to teach typing skills, free thought, and creative writing.

YMMV.

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.

Lies!

[OctoberSky]

This article is BS. I have tried many times to explain to my girlfriend why I spend so much time with my boxen. She won't accept...

1. I'm searching for deals on diamonds.
2. Just 10 more minutes.
3. It is cheaper than going out and partying.
4. Theres nothing but crap on TV (which is true)

If I told her I was working on "expanding my creativity" I am pretty sure she would "creatively" kick me in the nuts.

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:N-American children vs W-European Children

[CyricZ]

I know you were joking, but you do raise an interesting point concerning the cultural differences regarding the exposure of children to various content.

It is not uncommon for European children to be exposed to the naked bodies of men and women from a very young age. Boys grow up knowing what a pussy looks like from a very young age, unlike most boys in America. So once they hit their teen years, European boys usually do not go "crazy" for the vulva.

The human body is not as forbidden, and hence young people in Europe are not as inclined to gratuitously and unsafely perform sexual rites on each other. That is why the rate of teen pregnancies in Europe is often so much lower than that of other nations (eg. the US and Australia) that generally forbid the viewing of the human genitals.

Internet Creativity?

[TooMuchEspressoGuy]

I happen to agree with the article, in that the Internet WILL make our kids more creative than us. I mean, just look at what's happening now! Children and teenagers everywhere are breaking free from the artificial bonds known as "basic English" that the oppressive adult regime foists upon them! Why, just j00 wait and see! Soon these kids will be r future poets, artists, n arkitects! Like, OMFGLOLz! that wud b teh r0xx0r!

...ow. I think my brain cells just died.

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.

Their grammar MIGHT be better than the poster's

[Analogue Kid]

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.

I mean if you're not careful, you'll say stuff like, "I like eating cheeseburgers more than her," when you really mean, "I like eating cheeseburgers more than she does." NOT the same, bunky.

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

[Jon Peterson]

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.

Well duh, of course not. They'll be thinking of oral sex like everyone else.

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.

Information overload

[ChrisF79]

I'm not really convinced after reading the article (well, the one paragraph on the topic) that children are going to be more creative. I think by giving them so many channels of things to do, they're not forced to be as creative. I look at when I was growing up and the things I would do. I had Matchbox cars, legos, etc... Very static items that were only fun if I were creative. In fact, I remember spending a lot of time outside, finding L shaped sticks and pretending they were guns for a good game of cops and robbers with friends. Now, when I look at my little nephew, he spends a good deal of his time playing his gamecube. If he's not doing that, he's on the computer playing games on the net. Really, the only time he's doing anything similar to what I used to do is when he goes outside and rides his bike. The fact is, he really doesn't have to be creative because he has so many options at his fingertips that most of us didn't have when we were kids. Because of that, I really have to disagree with Berners-Lee.

More creative than us ? Surely you mean you?

[DataCannibal]

If by us, you mean you Mr "I-can't-be-arsed-reading-the-article-properly-and -realising-that the-headline-is-just-an-attention-grabbing-out-of- context-quote" Taco then your summary is probably correct, however what he is saying is that the way that our children use the internet in the future will amaze us. For those of use who experienced the arrival of the Internet and the Web, something like Wikipedia is astounding. For our children something like that is perfectly normal and they will be able to use the internet in creative ways that we can't imagine.

Sheeesh! It's not that hard to read an article properly. Do you get paid for what you do?

I'm not buying it

[Morinaga]

He really doesn't give the reasons he thinks children will be more creative with internet access. Perhaps he meant better informed?

For my sixth grade science project I made the monumental decision to do it on mold. I did not have Encarta on CD nor did the Internet exist. All I had was my science text book and those books at the library. I put bread in petri dishes and exposed them to various amounts of light, moisture, heat etc... These I used in my science display. I also remember my buddy Tim doing his on aerodynamics and his various balsa wood carvings placed in front of a fan. I can only imagine in todays era I would have used the Internet to print out color displays, found how-to guides on mold creation etc... Instead I experimented and created my own ways. I don't know if that was better because in the end I'm sure I was less informed that today's youth but I do think I was forced to be more creative.

ValuJet Predicts...

[ValuJet]

ValuJet Predicts it will make kids fat and lazy.

As far as proof goes, look at all the fat and lazy kids today.

Revenge of the English Teacher! Muahahaha!

[Analogue Kid]

Would you use the "cannibal" sentence? I don't think there's anything wrong with how I used like at all. I'm sure it was grammatically valid.

Why is it so ridiculous to use object pronouns for objects and subject pronouns for subjects? Is a sentence SUCH AS, "The next generation will be more creative than we are," that pompous?

There is a difference in the meaning of the following two sentences:

1) I like video games more than her.

2) I like video games more than she does.

The first compares my like for video games with my like for her. The second compares my like for video games with her like for video games. These two sentences could be expanded to the following:

1) I like video games more than I like her.

2) I like video games more than she likes video games.

Notice that the subject in the first clause of each sentence is "I". The subject is the one doing the verb. The object is the person or thing on the receiving end of the verb. In the second clause of the first sentence, the object is "her". The action (of liking) is received by "her". However, in the second sentence, "she" is the subject and "video games" are the object. "She" is doing the action (of liking), and "video games" are receiving the action (of liking). Unless there's a good reason not to, you should use the proper pronoun.

I think the issue of splitting infinitives is the same. If you make a habit of splitting them, it will be easy to, for the reader, get confused. Sometimes it sounds strange not to split an infinitive, and in those cases it's best to split them. The biggest "rules" about writing are to be clear, well organized, and persuasive.

Instead of just "asking anybody on the street" about any given topic, maybe you would do better to ask someone who is educated about it. Would you ask "anybody on the street" how to file your taxes or how to sing? If I were the one asking, I'd be a bit more selective. Nothing is lost by using the proper pronoun, unless your goal is "street cred". If that's the case, then by all means you can flame me hairless with Mr. T. English, gangsta slang, l33t w3rdz, or whatever.

Personally though, I think people who want to learn something about grammar should read the "grammar Nazi" posts, and those who don't should just skim over to the next post and let it go at that.

Socrates claimed "writing" weaken one's intellect

[peter303]

In Plato's Pharmacy, Socrates claims the use of writing will weaken one's intellect. Writing will weaken one's ability to memorize. Written records may preserve falsehoods.