Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Fair point, but if you believe that tablets are a gateway to cheap education and interactive learning for children (I do), I wouldn't say that poor communicates don't need tablets. I know it might seem like a luxury, an excess, or something you _want_ but do not _need_, but I'm not sure that's the case. I think it's easy and more impactful to get a cheap tablet in the hands of someone in need to help them learn, than a big computer. Particularly in urban communities, there might be something pretty profound about getting more tablets in front of young kids. It's up to them what they search for and what they learn, and it's up to us to nudge them in the right direction in terms of pre-loaded apps and websites - but I do believe there's something there. I don't care ONE BIT if the aluminum bevel is more beautiful or less beautiful, in that case.

Anyway, I think you and I generally agree. I would just say you don't have to go to a third world country to find someone who wants to save $200 on a tablet. You can find communities right here in America where their children have limited access to quality education, or bad temptations outside of classroom hours, and I would argue a cheap tablet _with the right content and direction_ might have a real impact.

Not that we should be outsourcing parenting to computers............

:-)




I'm not convinced (yet?) that tablets are good for children. I might be a bit too old, lacking the parenting experience, but I'm skeptical because a tablet might consume too much time better spent on exploring the rest of the world and it comes with a lot of content built by people whose primary consideration wasn't to teach children, but instead to make a quick buck. It might be better than TV (arguably...), but interacting with other people, animals, more "natural" objects ranks a lot higher with me...


This weekend, in between makeing a home for a catapiller we found on the way home from the park and riding bikes in the circle at the end of our street, my daughter said, 'daddy can we play the game (Hopscotch) where me make the animals move when we touch the screen. And she doesn't even know that I am showing her how to program (with an ipad). I'm sure there are android, windows, etc equivalents.

My point is that as her parent/teacher/friend it's up to me to show her when to use it as a tool for school, learning, manipulating and when to use it to consume. This is a much finer line as she can easily get lost in tangents of rainbow loom videos and forget that she started watching them to learn to weave a new bracelet. But apps like Hopscotch are genius for disguising logic, creative and critical thinking into a fun activity she considers a game.

So I posit that they are good. Like anything else good they should be used in moderation and it's up to the parentals to teach them how to use the tool instead of consuming from the tool. Both actities are using the tablet, but without moderation and guidance it's like giving a child access to unlimited money and expecting them to manage their finances themselves.

With regards to the quick buck apps - I tell here we don't download those b/c they just pop annoying adds and the other games she wants that have in app upgrades she has to save up her allowance ($3/week) if she wants them.

I'm saying that I think one can have both the tablet interaction along with the 'natural' interaction. And I say this as a biology major who grew up on 5 acres with a natural aquifer and a ravine that fed a 50 acre swamp. The onus is on the parents of the touch screen generation to recognize the dual potential for both creation & learning and consumption of the devices. The hard part is showing them how to balance the two or taking it away altogether and catching catapillers with them.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: