by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Thursday March 05, 2015 @03:32PM (#49190911)
it manages to be about Computer Science without actually ever directly referring to the subject or even to computers at all.
No, it manages to be a loosely connected chain of tired math/logic puzzles behind a transparent "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" facade.
The target audience of the book is probably children from around the age of 8 and up with the intention being to spark an interest in computers
Yeah, that'll go over well. Any kid willing to read this shit would already be interested in math/logic, and likely already know of many of the concepts in the book. Any kid not tickled pink by math/logic puzzles isn't going to read the book. You're not going to "spark an interest" this way.
I agree that it won't spark an interest that isn't already there, but it might spark a dormant interest in a lasting way. Maybe your criticisms are valid, I haven't read it, but then again we're not 8-year-olds.
I was probably going to be interested in math & science eventually anyway, but at that age I wasn't voluntarily reading any non-fiction science. But then I accidentally discovered an Isaac Asimov book, and I was hooked. Not long after that I asked for a subscription to Scientific American for Christmas. That book had a huge influence on me and got me started much younger than I would have otherwise. (And I can't even remember which Asimov book it was.)
The thing is, you don't know you're interested until you are exposed to it. I'm sure most slashdotters will agree that math & logic are inherently interesting, but that's because they already know a lot of it. You somehow have to learn enough to understand that it is more interesting than it is typically presented in school (hard as they try.)
Yeah, that'll go over well. Any kid willing to read this shit would already be interested in math/logic, and likely already know of many of the concepts in the book. Any kid not tickled pink by math/logic puzzles isn't going to read the book. You're not going to "spark an interest" this way.
I disagree. When I was 8-ish I had an interest in geeky things, but no simple, accessible math/logic problems to think about to begin growing my skills in that area. Math/logic puzzles written for a younger audience just weren't common. It wasn't until I was 12 or so that I found stuff I could actually read and understand enough to make progress on my own (beyond being good at arithmetic at a young age, which has nothing to do with math or logic really).
Maybe it's different today in our higher-tech world, with wikipedia and whatnot, but I had no way to get started. I see a lot of value in a the reinforcement - in having a kid who might be interested discover that they in fact are good at and enjoy such problems.
It also doesn't make sense to say "even to computers at all" since computer science as such isn't really about computers. So I would have thought that there isn't any reason why they should be mentioned in the first place.
Nope (Score:1, Interesting)
it manages to be about Computer Science without actually ever directly referring to the subject or even to computers at all.
No, it manages to be a loosely connected chain of tired math/logic puzzles behind a transparent "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" facade.
The target audience of the book is probably children from around the age of 8 and up with the intention being to spark an interest in computers
Yeah, that'll go over well. Any kid willing to read this shit would already be interested in math/logic, and likely already know of many of the concepts in the book. Any kid not tickled pink by math/logic puzzles isn't going to read the book. You're not going to "spark an interest" this way.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a new feature of Beta intended to line the owners' pockets.
Re:Nope (Score:4, Informative)
I agree that it won't spark an interest that isn't already there, but it might spark a dormant interest in a lasting way. Maybe your criticisms are valid, I haven't read it, but then again we're not 8-year-olds.
I was probably going to be interested in math & science eventually anyway, but at that age I wasn't voluntarily reading any non-fiction science. But then I accidentally discovered an Isaac Asimov book, and I was hooked. Not long after that I asked for a subscription to Scientific American for Christmas. That book had a huge influence on me and got me started much younger than I would have otherwise. (And I can't even remember which Asimov book it was.)
The thing is, you don't know you're interested until you are exposed to it. I'm sure most slashdotters will agree that math & logic are inherently interesting, but that's because they already know a lot of it. You somehow have to learn enough to understand that it is more interesting than it is typically presented in school (hard as they try.)
Re:Nope (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, that'll go over well. Any kid willing to read this shit would already be interested in math/logic, and likely already know of many of the concepts in the book. Any kid not tickled pink by math/logic puzzles isn't going to read the book. You're not going to "spark an interest" this way.
I disagree. When I was 8-ish I had an interest in geeky things, but no simple, accessible math/logic problems to think about to begin growing my skills in that area. Math/logic puzzles written for a younger audience just weren't common. It wasn't until I was 12 or so that I found stuff I could actually read and understand enough to make progress on my own (beyond being good at arithmetic at a young age, which has nothing to do with math or logic really).
Maybe it's different today in our higher-tech world, with wikipedia and whatnot, but I had no way to get started. I see a lot of value in a the reinforcement - in having a kid who might be interested discover that they in fact are good at and enjoy such problems.
Re: (Score:2)