On Jun 23, 2005, at 5:04 AM, Erich Dollansky wrote:

Hi,

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
I have to take my neighbour with her Ph.D. in biology again. We can
assume she has proven not to be a plain idiot. She got some of
the book,
looked at them for some days and said 'why should I study IT before I
can use FreeBSD'.

Why should I study the drivers manual before getting a drivers license?
I do not know why people do it. I just learned driving in a deserted place.

So...you learn what the interface tells you and your intuition can figure out. Other people learn by reading and finding out how things work so they actually know what's going on.

It's always entertaining to do something on the computer that the user never "stumbled across" before and is amazed that a task could be done that way. "How did you know that?" "I can read."

Even more fun are the people that stumble their way through applications to the point where it looks like they're doing something productive and may even end up with an end product (barely), but have no clue what they did or how they did it and what they ended up with was so "wrong" that it can end up being a headache for the next person in line to deal with. For example, there was someone I knew who did a small publication with a popular (read: Microsoft) application that required a number of graphics be inserted along with text boxes and a full layout all arranged before the "document" was sent to the printer (a printer as in a contracted publisher). The end result was nearly 400 meg. I looked at it and saw that they had inserted a number of graphics that were in their original format...namely, huge. I'm talking about jpg files that were easily over a meg each. The person had inserted the graphic and just scaled it down using copy and paste from a graphics program, so the original full-res image was getting embedded into the document when, for the quality of the printing that was going to be made, it was definitely not needed.

"Where are the graphics you used?"

"I don't know...I just have them on the desktop and here and there..."

So we spent some time trying to track those down, since the person didn't know how to organize their files so they had stuff spread out wherever "seemed to work". Some of the pictures were scanned in; where did they save them? Didn't know that either.

Next I showed them the difference between the application just scaling the image as viewed and embedded, and actually taking the image in an image editor and resizing it, then saving the resulting image and using that in the publication document. One meg pictures resized closer to the actual image size that was used in the document now only took a hundred kilobytes or so.

After going through this a few times (and making sure they saved the "new images" with a different filename to a specific directory so they could be referred back to), they set off on their own to continue the work.

The document that was 400 meg, when I checked before leaving, was down to around 80 meg, and they were still working on the document when I left the building.

Funny how sometimes knowing what you're doing by reading, working with it, trying to understand what's going on can beat raw "I don't really give a d*mn how it works as long as it seems to work" intuition sometimes.

I guess that's why it's harder nowadays to throw a car's transmission from drive into reverse. Too many "intuitive learners" out there.

We no longer wish to take responsibility for our actions, and we are being trained not to even think for ourselves. Curiosity is disappearing. Immediate results, even if they are wrong or done so inefficiently that the end product of our labor is crud, is preferred over actually learning how to do it right (or at least better than our random guesses).

And before pointing out that people learn by randomly guessing at how to do things, there is a difference between what is motivating the object of my criticism and the artisan hacker, with hacker being a term applied to far more than just computers; the former is randomly guessing at things to just churn out crud and doesn't care how it is done, has no urge to know what they are doing, they simply care about getting from point A to point B. The latter pokes at some things, finds this is the result, then analyzes the result and wonders...is there a better way to do this? Then they proceed to retry it with a different approach to compare the results. The latter gets from point A to point B, then looks to see if they could do it in a better way. If they get stuck they read the manual. Or they read articles and postings about the topic at hand to see if someone else found a better way. The latter also seem to be a dying breed.

As for the biologist neighbor not being an idiot and asking "why study IT to use it", well, if you're an IT person, are you qualified to be a biologist? Idiot or not...just because you're specialized in a particular field and "not an idiot" doesn't mean you're not clueless in other fields. Duh. Many people are not idiots in general but wouldn't know how to work an MRI, while for people trained to use it it's probably not all that difficult. It's more accurate to say your neighbor is most likely not an idiot in biology, and probably not in a few other fields of knowledge, but it doesn't necessarily mean she's not a technology idiot.

That is correct.  I don't allow someone to cut into my body until they
have carefully explained how the whole procedure works and I understand
it.  I'm surprised you do.
There is another difference. I asked 'my' surgeon a simple question: how many died in your hands doing this. The number wasn't zero but within avarage. With other words, I just trust them.

These are usually the people I hear talking on radio talk shows outraged that procedure XYZ went so wrong, or got duped into signing contract ABC when it's out of the norm for the industry...they just trusted the other person instead of looking up how it should be done. There was even a book at Barnes and Noble on how not to get scammed...I skimmed through it, wondering how in h*ll people could be so stupid. Now I realize that when we're trained not to think for ourselves but instead to trust the word of a self-proclaimed expert, we get a lot of easily tricked people in society. It doesn't take that much extra effort to consult with some other "experts" or online information to see what the consensus generally is on a topic most of the time.

_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to