On 18/12/02 13:14 +0530, tripta thus thundered: > continuing the conversations, > > about computers, systems and being savy about them. > > During the conversations with a `computer' tecaher at a reputed college > (women's), one of the issuses which came up was whether computer is a > `System' or is it a `machine'. would the interaction and understanding be > different if it was considered a machine? would people be more at ease with > it and the myth around it dissolve? for instance, sewing machine. women/ men > are not intimidated with it. they work on it, dismantle it and are confident > about it. what changes in the case of the computer? > > and in this course of conversation, we stumbled upon the same question: who is > computer savy? what does it mean to work with/on a computer? is it about > knowing the `software' `hardware'? how do the networks of processes of > production intersect with the the ones of actual `usage' or do they?
I believe that the exact phrase that Leo mentioned at the meet was "literate" - computer literate. He asked that who can be called a computer literate? A very relevant question. By our educational system right now a literate person is one who can type a letter using MS word, can make a small database app using MS Access, etc. - a pragmatic approach keeping in view of the market. But NOT an ideal one. Leos observation was that people need to realise where they are right now. They should start talking about changing the definition to include a man who can just type a letter(regardless of the tool), can work with any database etc. - Sandip -- -------------------------------------------------------- Sandip Bhattacharya sandipb <@> bigfoot.com http://www.sandipb.net GPG/PGP: 0x08EB637C -------------------------------------------------------- ================================================ To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe in subject header. Check archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd%40wpaa.org
