How computer literate are YOU?

[walfin]

computer? what the hell is that? can i eat it?

Yes.

In the army, we used to say: you can eat anything you want in the jungle, but there are some things you'll only be able to eat once.

 

[Felan]

So yes, I'm effectively computer illiterate now, to my chagrin, even though I wasn't at one point in time, and I'll have to start from scratch but I'm too lazy to do so. Considering I run a company which does something to do with computers, it's pretty sad, although actually I only have to know the bare minimum (and I have to use Windows at work anyway).

And for the record, I hate perl and its convoluted one-liners. If there's one language that can allow you to squeeze even more crap into one statement than C (or C++), it's perl.

Even though my job is programming and I put in 40 to 70 hours a week (more often closer to 40) I never think I'm caught up. It's maddening and exciting that there is always new stuff to learn and explore. And for me this is true even though I focus almost exclusively on .NET, which is but a part of the jungle of computer knowledge.

I think more important than freshness of specific knowledge are the agnostic skills and manners of thinking. I think those come from practice and are pretty timeless.

 

[walfin]

I think more important than freshness of specific knowledge are the agnostic skills and manners of thinking. I think those come from practice and are pretty timeless.

But paradigm shifts in programming happen all the time.

Like when C/Pascal style was displaced by OOP as the dominant philosophy.

It's still OOP now (I think), but when it changes it'll require a whole new manner of thinking.

 

[Felan]

But paradigm shifts in programming happen all the time.

Like when C/Pascal style was displaced by OOP as the dominant philosophy.

It's still OOP now (I think), but when it changes it'll require a whole new manner of thinking.

Functional programming, object-orientated programming, generic programming, procedural programming, and parallel programming are the dominant paradigms and all have been around since the 60's. Very little is actually new, but all of it is refined.

Still I would agree to picking up from where you left with time having dulled your programmer-wit, would not be a trivial undertaking. However these days the amount of information and help available is staggering compared to when I first started learning programming. Many tools are 100% free but still of commerical quality and many commerical products have free versions (Microsoft Visual Studio for example).

Being able to ask the right questions and wonder if there is a better way of doing some particular aspect of code are skills bred with experience I think (and a manner of thinking that Rationals excel at). I have trouble imagining how such can be taught, but based on my experiences with other coders it is far more valuable.

 

[Jaleho]

I think there's a spectrum in the term "Computer Literate" which makes it difficult to say what "literacy" is:

There's Hardware people who know all the best monitors and scanners and digital cameras, but have no idea how they work on the inside. They use terms like "megapixel" and "USB2" and "bluetooth".

There's Hardware people who could build a machine from spare parts and a soldering gun, but are mostly useless once you turn it on. They use terms like "SDRAM" and "motherboard" and "PCI Slot".

There's people who are masters of the "Press F8 to setup" screen, who know all about making a bunch of circuit boards talk to one another properly - they know terms like "slave drive" and "boot drive" and "bios settings".

There's people who understand the basics of computer science. They use terms like "I/O", "LIFO", "Read-Only Memory" and "bits". Before computers were invented, they were writing out these ideas on paper and doing them by hand.

There's operating system people who use terms like "kernel", "drivers", "GUI" and "virtual memory". They will argue the merits of DOS vs Windows vs Mac vs Linux.

Then you get into the base-level software folk, people who use terms like "shell", "assembly code", and "pointers". They actually know what some of those blue error screens mean.

Another step up are your common software people who talk about "variables", "loops" and "conditional statements". A lot of kids learn this stuff in school now.

Above that are your high-level programmers, who use words like "object", "method" and "interface". This is where programming is getting, and it allows for all your modern video games and more.

Beyond that, you have the networking folks using things called "LANs", "routers" and "servers". They get multiple machines talking to one another.

You also have the database people speaking about "tables", "php", and "sql injections". They manage user accounts, shopping carts, and forums like this.

Now you get to the folsk who USE computers, quite possibly in-depth, but don't necessarily know how all the underlying parts work. The basic users talk about things like "saving files", "duplicating folders", "double-clicking icons", "drag-and-drop" and so on.

Internet users know about "URLs", "hyperlinks", "email" and "forums". Used to be a nerd-only thing, now all the cool kids are doing it.

Business types may talk about "spreadsheets", "power point", "word processors" and "reports". To them, computers are either a confusing hassle or a way to speed up what they once did by hand.

Creative types may speak on end about "jpeg compression", "vector graphics", "gradients" and "pixels". Even the traditional painters and sculptors are having to learn the basics of this now, just to get their work seen.

I think there is a problem when someone actually HAS mastered like, two or three of these, and doesn't consider themselves "computer literate". It's like saying someone is "english illiterate" because they can't talk about particle physics and baking and engine repair... there are just too many areas of computing to be "literate" in. Sure, some people DO know a lot of these areas all at once, but when you start working in a place with a half-dozen "computer folk" you realize everyone has their strengths and weaknesses, and it's a lot more effective to work with others than try to know it all yourself.

But that won't stop an INTP from trying, now will it?

 

[aracaris]

I'm a bit of a computer nerd but by no means what I'd consider to be an expert...yet.
I can build computers, haven't done so in a long time, but plan to as soon as I've saved up enough.
I do design websites, using CSS and (X)HTML. I am going to be working on learning PHP, javascript (I only have bothered with the real basics of javascript so far), and all that good stuff.
I know very basic c++, and I'm working on learning more and more.

Jaleho is right, there really is quite a broad spectrum of computer literacy. There's a wide variety of possible things a person can become an expert on (software, hardware, programming etc...) while knowing almost nothing about the other things, or they could become a jack of all trades but extpert on none.

 

[Tunesimah]

I know I could be much more computer literate, but I really don't care. Computers don't fascinate me as the once did. I build my own computers, back when I cared more about PC gaming, and the whole 'hey I can build computers' had a new sheen on it. Now people want me to help them with their computers and I find it horribly frustrating helping others and how computers are set up.

I have a computer science minor, and really love solving an interesting problem using a programming language. That's fascinating. I hate learning programing languages, I hate the syntax and jargon and libraries. I hate learning networking interfaces and protocols... all that stuff is awful. There is much about computers that are fascinating, but much seems just soul sucking. And as we go into the future, the fascinating parts of computers becomes less and less... at least as a career.

In many ways I wish I was more computer illiterate. I don't like that I know how a computer works, or I was interested in how a computer works. I like how people can just throw up their hands and say they aren't a computer person and then it falls on the computer people to solve their problems. I want to view the computer as just a tool, but I get distracted by how it all works and want to change it and improve it.

I also hate that in the business world it seems like those in charge don't really understand computers, but can be easily impressed by the most ignorant.

 

[Latro]

From Jaleho's list, let's see what I fit:
#1 a little (I know the terms, I don't know what's the best).
#2 a little (I've built a machine (the machine I'm on was made last December), know some things about what the current good machines, etc.)
#3 A little. I know the terms, though I don't know my way around most of a BIOS.
#4 Not especially this; I know little about I/O and such things.
#5 Not really this either.
#6 Nor this.
#7 A solid chunk of this. I need to practice but I'm at least literate about such things.
#8 I know the gist of some of this, but I haven't actually thrown together anything object-oriented, even though I have written a class definition and used it.
#9 I know enough to set up a LAN using autoconfig and diagnose really obvious issues that ipconfig detects. That's about it.
#10 Quite this.
#11 Quite this.
#12 Though not in business, I'm comfortable with Excel and things that could be used in business, and use them to streamline my work (e.g. lab work).
#13 Not creative, and I don't know most of the terms.

So...about 4 of those. Adding up the other fractions I'd say the total is more like 5. I'd call myself computer literate.