Slashdot Mirror


The 'Net Generation' Isn't

Kanel introduces this lengthy review in Spiegel Online this way: "Kids that grew up with the Internet are not 'digital natives' as consultants have led us to believe. They're OK with the Net but they don't care much about Web 2.0 and find plenty of other things more important than the Internet. Consultants and authors, mostly old guys, have called for the education system to be reworked to suit this new generation, but they never conducted surveys to see if the members of 'generation @' were anything like what they had envisioned. Turns out, children who have known the Net their whole lives are not particularly skilled at it, nor do they live their lives online." "Young people have now reached this turning point. The Internet is no longer something they are willing to waste time thinking about. It seems that the excitement about cyberspace was a phenomenon peculiar to their predecessors, the technology-obsessed first generation of Web users. ...they certainly no longer understand it when older generations speak of 'going online.' ... Tom and his friends just describe themselves as being 'on' or 'off,' using the English terms. What they mean is: contactable or not."

38 of 435 comments (clear)

  1. Tech is still Tech, yucko! by couchslug · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There were no Techy generations. There were Techy people, be they blacksmiths or chip designers.

    Techy people of different generations did their thing, but most people are spectators who don't WANT to know how things work.

    They always will be, and for geeks, this is good.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by thms · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The tech learning curve is important as well. Those who grew up with computers in pre-GUI times had a rather steep curve but as a consequence became much more proficient.

      When the curve became flatter less understanding was required, however more people started using it. So I wonder if the mass adoption of technology compensates for the reduced required depth, i.e. if the first easy steps encouraged more people to take a deeper look at things compared to when you had no choice but to do that.

      Data on the percentage of computer users in each generation which were hobby programmers at a certain would be interesting.

    2. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by wintermute000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh absolutely positively correct

      I'm in the late 20s/early 30s bracket, the gen who grew up having to fiddle with DOS just to get games to run.
      All the techs @ work (I'm not counting desktop and helpdesk lol, poor sods) had this ingrained in their upbringing.
      The kids coming in who had click and install gaming have noticeably poorer troubleshooting skills, and in particular shy away from command line and text files.

      Still there will always be 'natural' geeks and techies, and most people won't care.

    3. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by richdun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seconded, both of you.

      And it's only getting "worse" - continuing your gaming reference, many kids just coming in now don't even "click and install." They "insert disc and put on headset."

    4. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd argue that computers in pre-GUI times had a much lower learning curve to get to the point of programming. You mucked about in BASIC to change a program to do what you wanted it to do.

      Now to muck about with a quick flash game, you have to decompile it, edit it in miles of Actionscript and timeline coding, and recompile it. Further, it is helpful if you understand http, xml, javascript, and basic networking to get anything done.

      Writing a game in BASIC was easy. Writing a modern game in XNA takes C#, 3D experience, miles of tutorials, etc.

      Say what you will about GUI's making things "easier" so that kids don't have to learn. The complexity of modern computing has thrown a huge wall up between the end user and real programming. I bet if you took any of the MIT genius kids from the late 70's and threw them in front of a modern computer, they'd be baffled too.

    5. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by BrokenHalo · · Score: 5, Funny

      THEN we could start it up on the CRT tube and play with light guns. now get off my lawn.

      Oh dear, I can feel a Yorkshire accent coming on. Back in my day, we didn't have CRTs, we had punch-card readers for input and barrel-printers for output. (I'm actually not lying - the machine was a Burroughs B3700 running MCP IV.)

      We never had to have an 'andful of cold gravel for breakfast, because we could leave it sitting on top of the ALU for a few minutes, and it would be nice and toasty warm.

    6. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by Rhaban · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Easier to use, Harder to make.

    7. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by Kanel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Roberta Williams, one of the game designers at Sierra in the 80's had a slightly different take on it. Home computers started out being rather expensive, which meant that the average computer owner was older and more educated. Maybe buying the computer as part of a college education for instance or having a well-paying job which helped one afford the computer. When PCs became affordable for the average joe, the "average gamer" changed and Sierra could no longer afford to write games that catered to an educated audience. They were just too small a part of the market.

      You could imagine that a similar impact was felt in all areas related to computers.

    8. Re:Tech is still Tech, yucko! by imakemusic · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean like internet tubes?

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  2. evidence? by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Many young people abandoned email for MySpace, then within a couple short years, abandoned MySpace for FaceBook, both times because spam made the previous system essentially unusable for them, and they didn't want to take the time to learn how to filter spam (not even to switch their email provider from, say, Yahoo, to GMail). They don't differentiate between "The Internet" and a service. To them, FaceBook is the internet.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
    1. Re:evidence? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You make an awful lot of assertions. In fact, the summary even talks about people like you who just make assertions about how 'young people' are.

      Can you support any of them? Because the article supports the opposite.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    2. Re:evidence? by SpeedyDX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And what's your evidence? Of course, we can probably only offer up our own anecdotes, so I'll offer mine up too.

      CBC Radio was talking about this earlier in the day. Young people seem to be viewing computers and the internet as tools they wield for doing whatever it is they want to do, be it contacting friends, maintaining social networks, communicating with other services, doing homework, etc. Many of them don't have the same curiousity or interest that many of us (the /. and other techy crowds) have towards these tools. A guest on the show lamented this, saying that we've lost the ability to "tinker" with our tools (*cough*), and that tinkering is an essential life skill.

      I don't really agree with that guest. Many of us use tools to accomplish our goals without trying to tinker with them. I drive a car regularly and have no interest in knowing the ins and outs of its mechanics. Similarly with vacuum cleaners, washers and dryers, mechanical pencils, radios, and many other tools you may come across in your daily life. If it works, and helps me do what I want to do, that's all I care about. It's the same attitude that this younger generation (many of those in my university specifically) takes towards computers and the internet.

      I think that is the real measure of how integrated something is in our lives. We don't really have to think twice about the tools we use in order to live our lives on a daily basis. They're just there, and we can use them when we need them, and we don't have to know everything about them.

      But that doesn't mean that they're stupid. They know "the internet" is a sort of virtual space where services reside. Whatever hand-waving or magic or technological means are involved to deliver those services to them do not matter to them, so long as it works. And that's a perfectly fine attitude to take, imho. We all take that attitude to at least some degree towards at least some of the tools we use on a daily basis. This just boils down to people having different interests in different things. But to try to insinuate that young people are stupid (and unable to differentiate between the internet and Facebook, for example) just because they take that sort of attitude towards something that you or I are interested in is just bigotry. The inner workings of "the internet" are as foreign to them as the techniques and history of knife forging are to me. That's all there is to it.

    3. Re:evidence? by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wow, I either have a distorted view of what "digital native" means or you do.

      The US is full of car natives. When you wanna go to the mall to hang out with your friends you don't go saddle the horse.

      This younger generation is full of Internet natives. When you wanna talk to your friends you don't reach for the telephone or pull out the quill and ink pot, you jump online.

      FFS, what are you people talking about, you're on a god damn Internet forum.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:evidence? by SpeedyDX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I drive a Honda, but that might be besides the point.

      You bring up a fantastic point. There are different features in different cars. Some of them have more or less horsepower, some of them have more or less torque at certain RPM bands, whatever. I don't know much about cars, like I said. But none of that really matters to me. What does matter to me is my experience with the car. When I drive my car, I have certain interactions with it that occur on a regular basis. Feeling the comfort of the seat, the feel and weight of the steering wheel, the sound of the engine, the appearance, etc. Then there are things that don't happen, like accelerator recalls, frequent breakdowns, etc. Those are the things that I'm interested in w.r.t. cars. As long as my car performs as intended and I have a good experience driving it, that's all that matters to me. All the numbers don't matter. I don't need to care whether or not it has more or less horsepower than another model, or whether it has a v4 or v6 engine, or whatever, as long as it performs as expected under the normal range of driving conditions.

      This is exactly the same as how many people view computers. They don't need to know whether you have a Core i5 750 or a Phenom II x6 1055T. Those words and numbers mean nothing to them. As long as the computer performs as expected under normal conditions and they have a good experience with it, that's all that matters. This is why Apple computers sell. People don't care about the specs, they don't need to care about the specs. Sure, you pay a price premium for Apple. But what do you get in return? A really easy to use OS that requires little if any configuration. A good enough tech support that will help you fix your problem (with whatever voodoo magic, for all they care) and that is easily reachable and has a human face. You or I may debate the merits of getting a Phenom II x6 or a Core i5, or whether to stick with an AM2+ motherboard or upgrade to AM3, depending on whatever purposes we have. But most people just want a machine for general use purposes, and none of those specs make a huge difference. As long as you're buying current gen hardware (or even hardware from one or two gens previous), it's good enough for most people.

      The take-home is that for many of our tools, it doesn't matter how exactly it works, as long as it works and we have a good experience using those tools. You might be interested in those tools, and others might not be.

      As for the crappy drivers, I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to get at. There's almost no expectation that you need to know how a car works in order to get a driver's license in most places that I know of. You need to have basic knowledge of how to drive a car, basic driving techniques, the rules of the road, etc. If you think that the problem lies in people not knowing how cars work, then you might want to take that up with your local politicians. It seems to me, however, that crappy drivers are crappy drivers not because they don't know the mechanics of their car, but because they don't give a shit about the rules of the road and have no common courtesy.

    5. Re:evidence? by Capt.+Skinny · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've noticed that as I get older I can relate more and more to people who just want things to work. It was one thing to dick around with a shell script for 20 hours in desktop support to automate something that would have taken me only 2 hours to do manually (fully admitting that the bulk of the value was in the learning experience), but now that my time is valuable (to both me and the people paying me) I like to get on with what I'm supposed to be doing. When shit breaks and it isn't my job to fix it, I'm now very likely to hand the problem off to whomever does have the job of fixing it. There's only so much time available, and if I dig into everything that looks cool I'll forever be jack of all trades, master of none. OTOH, maybe I've just become jaded.

      Certainly don't mean to criticize the hacker spirit, only to give some perspective for "wanting it to work." I'll bet there are several things these teens care about the elegance (or cruft) of -- but none of them happen to be the net.

    6. Re:evidence? by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, we have a bias for our times. How many teen girls knew how to fix a TV in the 50s? But they all used it.

    7. Re:evidence? by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Repeat after me: Email is NOT a file transfer protocol.

  3. First, this is talking about Germany by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And not the whole world or America.

    I'm a native of both and the article rings somewhat true of the people I know. But to be blunt about it, I think there is more to do in Germany, especially in this age range. More clubs, more affordable entertainment options, more and cheaper excercise options. More mass transit too, to get there.

    I grew up as a latchkey kid in suburban borderline rural America and summered there. When I was 10-15, I was bored out of my mind most days and would have loved something like the internet. I was just too far from anything entertaining, including other kid's houses. It all comes down to having a car culture, imo.

    One example, I find pools very expensive in America. Even my YMCA isn't cheap and is like 7 miles away. In Germany, a schwimmbad, hallenbad, etc are somewhat ubiquitous and cheap (5 euros entrance). The outdoor baths are particularly nice, having several pools, one usually Olympic size. None of this means anything if you can't get to it, but again, Germany has massive transit especially rail, and bus, and it doesn't take hours to get anywhere like the bus systems I know from Seattle or Philadelphia. Also, there are sidewalks and bikepaths everywhere, on the side of the road. Here, I had 3 friends that got hit over the years because it's mostly patchwork, if it exists at all.

    There can be other factors and I'm sure urban kids have a different experience.

  4. Yeah by Wolfraider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Today's kids have grown up with the net. It is so in-graved into today's society for most that most kids don't even think about it. The net is nothing special now like it was years ago. I remember years ago when the net first came around to everyone. It was something special and new then. I used to spend hours just looking around and finding new and different things. Now I mainly go to the few websites I like. It went from a new fascinating thing to simply a tool to get the job done. The magic is gone from the net now that it is everywhere and used by almost everyone. Just comes with the times.

  5. Wrong conclusion by pshmell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm 19. I care about the 'net and social networking and the effect it has on the evolution of culture and social intelligence. I think what this study means to conclude is that the 'net has become integrated so much into our lives that it has lost that 'new car' feel. That doesn't make it any less important.

    1. Re:Wrong conclusion by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're also part of a self-selected group which is not only more skilled at technology, but which has a higher degree of interest in it in general. You're basically skewed data.

      I'm 26. We got our first dial-up internet connection when I was in 6th grade. I was tracked 'gifted and talented', and so got to do cooler science and math projects, and having the internet, even on 28.8k dial-up, was a major boost for me. (later I got 33.6 and 56k that only really ran at about 49-50k; broadband wasn't available in my area until my sophomore year of college, and then it didn't matter for me most of the time anyway). I was introduced to FreeBSD by the guys who ran my ISP, and then later to Linux which I've never really learned to like as much. I got to watch one day when the telco guys came to add a an additional T3 at the demarc, which was a big deal for scalability because they then added in a bunch more modem banks since they could handle the capacity.

      I mention that because my "generation" grew up hearing carrier tones and having to do more things manually, with slower bandwidth. The "modern internet" by-and-large works so much more easily and at higher rates, that it doesn't take so much effort to get things done. Thus, most people never have to think about it.

      Hell, I've talked to professional computer people in their earlier 20s, say 20-22, who think that 'kermit' is just a Muppet. That's truly sad.

  6. The 'Net-Generation is/will be in Africa by line-bundle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I put forward a controversial/unpopular position.

    For most technology most (99.99%) people just use what they have or are given and apply what they have known from the past. They lack the imagination or resources to create anything original. Life is just too complex to change what works. Yes, for most people the computer is just a typewriter, and that's what they will teach their children.

    If you really want to continue with your quest for the 'Net generation then the place you are most likely to find them is in Africa, or those countries who will have to make a big leap from stone age to internet age. Africa has far more original/innovative uses of cell phones because they were not baggaged with land-lines.

  7. A glimpse of the blindingly obvious... by SnowDog74 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First adopters are always the biggest geeks. The internet, however, is less about its applications today than it is about content. When I started college, the World Wide Web was just emerging, and one had to have some technical aptitudes to know what to do with a PPP dialer, Eudora or, even more primitive, PINE mail, Gopher, Telnet, etc. The first major graphical browser, NCSA Mosaic, had just come out. But the net is so ubiquitous and content driven that users aren't talking about the net in terms of its technology... they're talking about it in terms of content: movies, music, images, news, friends, games, etc.

    A technology becomes most useful is when the tech itself is at its most transparent, and the user is directly interfacing with their content with no tremendous awareness of the underlying layers (e.g. OSI model)... and that is precisely how it ought to be, be it for casual or business usage.

  8. Re:They are users, nothing more. by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are users, nothing more

    And they will be used.

    ~

  9. Psh. by amanicdroid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Next you'll tell me that MTV generation didn't understand how a CRT worked and merely accepted the 60 hz spray of electrons into their eyeballs thoughtlessly.

    Or that the telephone generation of the 50s didn't spend long hours thinking about the automation of connections.

  10. Is it really any suprise? by w0mprat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Internet has disappeared into the walls like indoor plumbing and electricity. After much novelty, it becomes ubiquitous, for these kids it's just there and always has been.

    The neophillia is experienced by the generation that bridge the period between when you had to walk to get water, and the period when you didn't, when you lit a candle and when you flicked a switch.

    I understand the importance of a global digital network because I remember in my childhood there wasn't one, in my teenage years it was developing, and now I have a career in it. I've bridged the period of and no new generation will experience the same thing.

    What changes will my children face.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  11. Err, what? by zogger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What the heck do you *do* then, that you have no interest in, or skills in, those things that make up technological civilization? Egads I simply can't imagine being that un-curious about things. Being a tool user is what separates us from the lesser primates. You say you use this or that that this "someone else" knows how to make work, to do what you want to do, so what is that, just be a media consumer, or what?

      This is mind boggling to me, I grew up with a tool box and tearing stuff apart and building things, etc, ALONG with reading all sorts of things, being interested in nature and learning about that, etc. Granted, I don't program, and that is because my mind just doesn't work that way, linear and rote memory, I think spatially, which is why I have always preferred the GUI..but that still didn't stop me from learning to build/assemble computers either, have done that a bunch.

      If you are a representative of this generation and demographic they are talking about in the fine article (or older I guess but with the same attitude), what the heck do you DO? Those kids, what the heck do they DO?

    Note: not being snarky or flaming, not at all, your post just blew me away, I honestly do not know a single person in meatspace like the folks in the article and somehwat you who have no apparent interest in any technology that we all use, other than having someone else do it so you can use it.

    1. Re:Err, what? by cowscows · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because someone isn't interested in the same things that you are doesn't mean that they're not curious. Maybe they're interested in understanding people, maybe they're interested in how to run a business, maybe they just want to know everything about training dogs. Civilization takes all kinds of people, and fortunately different people seems to be attracted to different things.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  12. It's all about advancing your career by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you declare a revolution and talk about how everything will change, you can get published. Present at conferences. Invited to speak. And maybe even get paid for it, or else get new job offers or consulting gigs.

    And everyone is so desperate to improve education that they'll grasp at anything to prove to the public that they're making big strides in changing education, even if there's NO PROOF of any change in educational income. It's snake oil.

    The expensive, commercial, packaged curriculum products have the same problem. There's little evidence to back up one versus the other, and few studies showing any educational benefit. But the districts, desperate to fend of being attacked for doing nothing, spend limited educational dollars on them.

    My prediction? Perversely, schools will spend more money on technology and materials as their funding is squeezed and test scores count more and more. After a couple of years of declining scores, they'll abandon whatever the current efforts are and spend a ton on new ones. And it'll just keep going.

  13. techies will always be in the minority by PJ6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For years I watched younger family members grow up from wee lads and thought to myself, oh boy, next generation, they're going to make me look like a Luddite. Yet the outcome I had feared - finding myself suddenly behind the curve, no longer able to catch up with technology, maybe even "average"... deep down, I think would have preferred that. Having 20 year olds ask me for computer help makes me sad. It makes me want to say, you kids were supposed to charge ahead. But I don't see you charging anywhere. You don't even vote.

  14. Where is the answer? by zogger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ya, but WHAT? In the fine article the kid outlined said he was really into basketball, and that was it. whoopedy zing, that's it??? for real? So I repeat, what do they DO? Just entertainments, media consumption, play sports? Anything serious? Just saying that "they don't do what you like to do" isn't answering the question, it is just further dodging it.

    And really, to repeat, I am not trying to "get off my lawn" dump on anyone or any generation, it is just fascinating in an odd way to me to think there are humans out there who have no interest at all in how things around them work, that using actual tools is just never even considered, that that is for someone else, this vague someone else to do.

    I am *seriously* reminded of that somewhat famous heinlein quote about specialization and insects. And what makes it worse, is that even the specialization is apparently being ignored now, appears they want to "do" anything else but work/build/create/explore. Just some sort of existence with no real purpose, no drive or something, anyone but them needs to "do that" so they can...what?? Just live, contribute nothing back, expect to go their entire lives like that??

        I don't know, that's why I am asking. And that is what I was wondering, I just can't believe it, so I want to know what really takes the place of being a tool using tinkering human today, especially in this demographic in the article.

    1. Re:Where is the answer? by SpeedyDX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm a philosophy student, and I often get a lot of flak for it. People think that philosophy doesn't matter, and that you need to be a productive member of society and contribute to technology or science or the economy or whatsoever. I think that's what you're trying to get at when you asked "Anything serious?". It seems like to you, you feel that there's some purpose in exploring how things in the world around you work, and to contribute to human knowledge or technology by creating new tools or discovering new principles. Of course, what you do, and what many people in the science and technology sectors do, are very important. I could not practice philosophy as comfortably as I do now without many of the conveniences afforded to me by our current level of science and technology. I recognize that science, technology, and business play a big role in our lives, and that the people who are in those industries are contributing greatly to society.

      I don't think many people just exist, as you say. The vast majority of people work. Of those people who do work, a significant minority don't have the resources to do anything but work, eat, socialize a little, play a little, sleep, rinse, repeat. But even those people contribute to society. If we didn't have janitors or retail sales clerks or whatever the case may be, our society would look a lot different. Our society requires some people be at those positions. And while you may still believe in the American Dream, the reality is that most of those people just can't afford to have any drive beyond going to work 10 hours a day to make ends meet.

      I suspect, however, that your question is directed more towards those who can afford to develop some sort of drive. And that's why I brought up that I'm a philosophy student. I philosophize. What does that mean? Philosophy means something very different to those who actually study it than to those outside of its sphere. Philosophy is more a way of life than anything. I've studied many subjects in philosophy, ranging from logic to ethics to metaphysics. Philosophy is what I enjoy, and that's my drive. I want to try to reconcile the disconnect between subjective experience and objective occurrences (neural activity). I want to examine why people hold certain systems of ethics and not others, and whether or not there exists some objective measure of morality. So I live my daily life using tools, while using the time I save not worrying about those tools to pursue my interests, and my drives.

      Other philosophers are logicians. They examine how systems of logic work, and what types of logical moves are valid or invalid. Now logic is important because there's one problem that the scientific method faces, but most scientists are unaware of such a problem. Scientists wield logic as a tool to perform their work, but they don't examine it on a deeper level. The problem that the scientific method faces is that it centres around the logical move that we call inductive reasoning. I won't dive into the specifics of the problem here, but suffice it to say that I don't think it's a major concern that scientists rely on inductive reasoning even though they don't know exactly how it works, and why it is problematic. Scientists have a certain goal and they need to use certain tools. Their job is not to ensure that their tools work. It is the logician's job to make sure that scientists have good tools with which to perform their jobs.

      Now all of this is a manner of saying that some people can't afford to have any drive, while others have different drives than you do. We're all doing something. It seems like you don't realize that there are other things that people can be interested in that are worthwhile. The problem of induction is an important problem in philosophy, as well as the concept of causality. In other disciplines, there are other problems that are interesting that people want to tackle. Some people want to fi

    2. Re:Where is the answer? by tsm_sf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As opposed to a self-righteous and smug generation with a sore shoulder from patting itself on the back?

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
  15. I have to disagree with that by brokeninside · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ``Hell, I've talked to professional computer people in their earlier 20s, say 20-22, who think that 'kermit' is just a Muppet. That's truly sad.''

    I dunno. It seems to me that in the grand scheme of things Kermit the Frog is far more influential and important than the protocol which was named after him

  16. The 'Net Generation' from Ground Zero by ridley4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm probably a bit alone on this thing, but I may as well post my .02c

    I am a seventeen year old high school student and this struck a chord or ten. I always had a love of the technical and the arcane, from when I disassembled and reassembled everything I got my grubby little hands on. I've had to work with my similar-aged, and it just keeps on ringing in my head just how this vast network of loosely connected fiber and copper with the rare bits of 3.2GHz in the short haul is taken so for granted by every other person near my age. Never did I really look at anything without at least some bewilderment and awe at just how far technology has advanced in my two short decades of life.

    My first computer was an 80386 running MS-DOS, and I think I am not alone here (at least with the C64 crowd et al.) with how what I did mostly with it was spending hours and hours in the BASIC implementation, crappy as it as, it was definitely a thing I had a blast on, even if it wasn't a real programming language in all honesty. I remember just how astounding it was to look at the numbers when I migrated to a Tualatin Celeron with a jaw-dropping 1.2 GHz of raw processing power compared to something that didn't break the hundreds. And a GUI? And this strange mouse? What just invaded my desk? And... where did my system's guts go, over everything?!

    That old jalopy still held quite a bit of good times and memories, especially when I managed the impressive task of making a bouncing square on an NES with it or a loud and high pitched 25% duty cycle pulse wave that'd wake up the whole family with a press of A. I never did any concerted efforts to make any homebrew for it, that said. I even remember after reading this one guy's paper on the inner workings of Metroid's engine and spending more time in hex editors altering the the levels slightly. Hell, my first connection to the internet was a blazing fast 28.8k!

    Words can't describe how shocked I was at how carefree people were to the machines I studied so endlessly when I discovered in middle school most of the kids my age didn't even know what the NES is, let alone nifty little tricks like breaking the 10NES or bank-switching to deal with the low ceiling, or how I still can't understand how someone of any age has such a weak sense of wonder and amazement that they cannot care the slightest in how something works or why it works or why when you remove this little cylindrical thing the pretty pink smoke starts to puff from the magical box of P and N doped silicon. I couldn't leave anything alone and I made sure I knew what the hell happened in the appliances I used, simply because a black box is just dull and inviting to be pulled apart and (hopefully) put back together.

    Nor can any words put just how much I enjoyed studying the computers of older times, and just that same wonder once more when I realize that the PDP-8 at its most expansive configuration can be fully emulated on a CPU and its cache these days, or spending a few weeks with my father's tools making a mechanical turing machine (with an impressively large tape - 80 spaces made from a notched meter stick), the days I'd spend just learning, learning, learning. When I discovered Wikipedia in 2007 it was as if the world was opened to me, a compendium of all human knowledge (or at least the "relevant" part of it *cough*) at my fingertips, and I'd only have to wait a few minutes for an in-depth explanation on any topic I'd ever think of. The world-wide web is the reason why I had any chance at all to really get so deep into computing before even reaching the age of majority.

    And with this, I can say I really was born in the wrong generation. To get the chance to see the computing explosion and the rise of the internet as it happened than in retrospect is something I would kill to get, and it's a sad thing that nobody my age can give even a quarter of a damn about the engineering marvels they have in their homes. (I Am Not An Adult(tm), so YMMV on this statement and all that.)

  17. Do we all need to get off your lawn? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, you are 26 and already being crotchety? I'm 30 and I think you are exhibiting "Cranky old person syndrome" in a bad way.

    You are bitching because people don't know about some old, somewhat obscure, modem protocol? What the fuck? Why would they? Hell even many people who used modems didn't know about it because they didn't use it with the systems they were on (XMODEM and ZMODEM were way more popular in my experience).

    As a counterpoint, do you know all about the telegraph, how it came to be, the development, the refinements, the way it changed the world? Can you tell me about the different kinds of keys and what they are good at? What can you tell me about the life of the man who invented it? Can you even tell me his name (without looking it up)?

    There are actually questions I CAN answer... Because I did extensive academic research on Morse. It is an extremely important part of our communications history and shaped many other developments (for example it was the very start of the move to electronic funds, with the ability to 'wire' money). However I do not expect random people to know about it. There is no reason to. It is now a historical relic, Morse Code practiced by very few people any more and no longer required even for amateur radio licenses. It is an important part of our history, but not something I expect everyone to learn about.

    That is just one example, I could pick many more. Don't get grumpy because the things that were new to you are old to others. That's called progress and it is a wonderful thing.

    Now get off my lawn. :D

  18. What it means is it is mature by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can't pinpoint precisely when it happened, but it was pretty recent, probably around 2005. The Internet finally reached a real stage of maturity where basically everything humans wish to create was on it, where it was easy and accessible to use by all that can afford it and so on. It fully became the useful, fun, device it is today. As such it really does just blend in to everyday life. I don't marvel at it unless I stop to think about the development I've seen. Normally, it just fades in to the background, it is just another part of my life that I assume to be around, and get annoyed if it isn't.

    I think that is something that geeks miss, they used the Internet early and used it as a geek toy. Thus they don't consider the larger development. When the Internet first started it really wasn't good for much at all. Universities could make some use of it for research but it was mostly just a communications toy. By the early to mid 90s it was getting fairly accessible. Most people could get a connection if they liked and you didn't have to be a geek to play with it. However it was largely useless still, other than to play. You could look at various websites people had tossed up, chat with people around the world, but that was about it. It wasn't a tool for getting anything done.

    By the late 90s it was coming in to its own as useful. There were legit stores on there, like Amazon, and some unique services, like eBay. More and more useful information was online, companies were using it for business. Still wasn't fully mature though. There was plenty you couldn't do on the Internet. During the early parts of 2000 it just sort of grew and filled in most gaps. It matured to the point where nearly everything is online, you use it just like any other communications system. It is a primary way to get information, conduct commerce, and so on.

    It was a fast, and rather seamless, process and hence hard to see. There aren't really any tipping points. The Internet just grew up and went from a toy just for geeks to something it is hard to imagine not having. As you said, it is now like the other services we have, rely on, and take for granted. That means it is fully integrated in to our lives, that it is a mature technology.

    As far as I'm concerned, that is a wonderful thing.

  19. tl;dr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You certainly have the TL;DR part of philosophy nailed.