My wife and I started talking about this after she had to help an old lady at the DMV figure out how to use her iPhone to scan a QR code. We’re in our early 40s.
My wife and I started talking about this after she had to help an old lady at the DMV figure out how to use her iPhone to scan a QR code. We’re in our early 40s.
They weren’t making an argument. They were asking a question. Still, if I assume their position is for or against the idea presented, I’m confused how this car example relates
Their argument centres around the assumption that people become knowledge and adept with technology that they are exposed to. I.E., people will be good with technology because they grew up with said technology. Or written more plainly, “John grew up using a computer so they must know that device intimately.”
The car example shows that’s not the case. That using, being around and generally living with cars has not made people more knowledgeable in their inner workings.
The point is you need to do more than just use or familiarize yourself with something to really understand its inner workings. Cars, toasters, microwaves, TVs. We all use the, have grown up with them but still most of society has no clue how these things work. Ask people in your life to explain how a simple toaster works. The parts. What heats the bread? How does the power supply work. Hell ask them how many watts their toaster is. Hey, explain electricity, something all of have been privy too for generations now.
No one has mentioned knowing how something works except for you… this feels like a tangent, however yeah I agree people should indeed try to understand the basics of the tech they depend on.
Sidenote: it’s a sadly familiar feeling to get downvoted for such an innocuous comment as I was just now downvoted for…
You’re the only tangent here
I gave you the benefit of doubt, I shouldn’t have.