好奇心机制_技术正在杀死人们的好奇心吗？
好奇心机制
I was talking with Kishau Rogers this week at a Hackathon we were helping with at The White House for ThinkOfUs. (See how I dropped The White House in there like it was nothing? It was everything. More on that later.)
本周我在白宫为ThinkOfUs提供帮助的黑客马拉松上与基绍罗杰斯交谈。 (看看我是怎么把白宫扔在那儿的，什么都没有？这就是一切。稍后再介绍。)
You'll remember Kishau from her excellent podcast where she proposed that we should NOT teach kids how to code...but rather we need to teach kids (and people) how to think about systems. Folks just don't know how stuff works. Maybe we're old(er) but we found ourselves asking, is tech killing curiosity? This post has more questions than answers, so I hope you sound off in the comments!
您会记得Kishau在她出色的播客中提出的建议：我们不应该教孩子如何编码...而是我们应该教孩子(和人们)如何思考系统。 人们只是不知道东西是如何工作的。 也许我们年纪大了，但我们发现自己在问，科技正在消除好奇心吗？ 这篇文章的问题多于答案，所以希望您能在评论中大放异彩！
I have this glorious pocket super computer with me now. It connects to all the world's collected knowledge, has an advanced battery, radio transmitter, and so much more. But most people have no idea how it works? Yes, technically you don't have to know how it works, but aren't you curious?
我现在有这个光荣的袖珍超级计算机。 它可以连接世界上所有已收集的知识，并具有先进的电池，无线电发射器等等。 但是大多数人不知道它如何工作？ 是的，从技术上讲，您不必知道它是如何工作的，但您不是很好奇吗？
We can make lists about how "there's two kinds of people in the world" and split them up into techie and non-techie, or computer literate or non-computer literate...but I'm thinking it's simpler. There's the curious and the not-curious.
我们可以列出“世界上有两种人”的方式，然后将其分为技术人员和非技术人员，或者计算机知识或非计算机知识……但我认为这很简单。 有好奇和不好奇。
I took apart my toaster, my remote control, and a clock-radio telephone before I was 10. Didn't you? What's the difference between the people that take toasters apart and the folks that just want toast? At what point do kids or young adults stop asking "how does it work?"
在我10岁之前，我拆开了烤面包机，遥控器和时钟无线电话，不是吗？ 拆开烤面包机的人和只想烤面包的人有什么区别？ 孩子或年轻人在什么时候停止询问“它如何工作？”
As each new layer of abstraction becomes indistinguishable from magic we may be quietly killing curiosity. Or shifting its focus. Is the stack so deep now that we can't know everything?
随着每一个新的抽象层都与魔术变得难以区分，我们可能会悄悄地消除好奇心。 或转移其重点。 现在堆栈如此深，以至于我们一无所知？
There's a great interview question I love to give. "When you type foo.com into a browser, what happens? Then what happens? Then what happens?" I ask this question not because I care how deep you can go; I ask because I care how deep you care to go. Where does your interest stop? How do you THINK it works? Where does technology end and where does the magic (for you) begin? HTTP? TCP? DNS? Voltage on a wire? Registers in chips? Quantum effects?
我喜欢给一个很棒的面试问题。 “当您在浏览器中键入foo.com时，会发生什么？然后会发生什么？然后会发生什么？” 我问这个问题不是因为我在乎你能走多深。 我问，因为我在乎你在乎有多深去。 您的兴趣在哪里停止？ 您如何看待它的工作原理？ 技术在哪里结束，魔术(对您而言)在哪里开始？ HTTP？ TCP？ DNS？ 电线上的电压？ 筹码登记吗？ 量子效应？
I do an Exploring Engineering class at local colleges each year. I love to open up a text file, type the alphabet, then open that text file in a hex editor and go "hey, the letter 'a' is 61 in ASCII, why?" Then I add a carriage return/line feed (13/10) and ask a room of confused 18 year olds "what's a carriage and why does it need to return?" I take a record player in and talk about the similarities between how it works versus how a hard drive or blu ray works. I see where the conversation takes the class. Inevitably the most engaged kids (regardless of their actual knowlegde) will end up being great engineering candidates. But where did their curiosity come from?
我每年都会在当地大学开设探索工程课。 我喜欢打开一个文本文件，键入字母，然后在十六进制编辑器中打开该文本文件，然后输入“嘿，字母'a'在ASCII中为61，为什么呢？” 然后，我添加回车/换行(13/10)并询问一个困惑的18岁儿童房间：“什么是回车，为什么需要回车？” 我将介绍唱机，并讨论其工作原理与硬盘或蓝光工作原理之间的相似之处。 我看到了对话在哪里上课。 不可避免地，最忙碌的孩子(不管他们的实际知识如何)最终将成为出色的工程学候选人。 但是他们的好奇心是从哪里来的呢？
Perhaps curiosity is an innate thing, perhaps it's taught and encouraged, but more likely it's a little of both. I hope that you're stretching yourself and others to ask more questions and explore the how and why of the world around you.
好奇心也许是与生俱来的事情，也许是受过教育和鼓励的，但更有可能两者兼而有之。 我希望您能使自己和他人发问更多问题，并探索周围世界的方式和原因。
Non-technical people, here's a secret. We tech folks have no idea what the problem is. We just try to narrow it down, removing variables.
— Scott Hanselman (@shanselman)非技术人员，这是个秘密。 我们的技术人员不知道问题是什么。 我们只是尝试缩小范围，删除变量。
— Scott Hanselman(@shanselman) May 28, 2016 2016年5月28日
What do you think? Is 21st century technology making it too easy? Are iPhones so magical sitting atop the last millennium of technology that it's not worth teaching - or even wondering - how it all fits together?
你怎么看？ 21世纪的技术是否太容易了？ iPhone是否在上千年的技术中占据了如此神奇的位置，以至于不值得教-甚至不知道-它们如何组合在一起？
Sponsor: Many thanks to Stackify for sponsoring the feed this week! Stackify knows developers are the center of the universe. That’s why Stackify built Prefix and will give it out free forever. No .NET profiler is easier, prettier, or more powerful. Build better—now!
赞助商：非常感谢Stackify本周赞助了feed！ Stackify知道开发人员是宇宙的中心。 这就是Stackify构建Prefix并永久免费提供的原因。 .NET探查器没有一个更简单，更漂亮或更强大。 更好地构建-现在！
关于斯科特 (About Scott)
Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.
斯科特·汉塞尔曼(Scott Hanselman)是前教授，前金融首席架构师，现在是演讲者，顾问，父亲，糖尿病患者和Microsoft员工。 他是一位失败的单口相声漫画家，一个玉米种植者和一本书的作者。
翻译自: https://www.hanselman.com/blog/is-technology-killing-curiosity
好奇心机制