Re: Re: RE: RE: starship-design: Numbers needed for Colonization (was Antiprot

[Kelly St <KellySt@aol.com>]

In a message dated 5/17/98 9:54:52 PM, madhobby@geeky1.ebtech.net wrote:

>> No thats exactly wrong.  Children now can't do the kind of things workers
and
>> exploreres on a starship or space colony would need to know how to do.  Ok,
he
>> cracked the internal security for his kindergarden.  Could he design one?
>> Could he do toxicitie research studies of alien microbes?  Or develop a
high
>> level AI?
>> 
>Who are you to say a child couldn't?  If given a chance, and not treated
>as though they're half-braindead, children can do some incredible things.
>The only seperation between a child and an adult is strength - a child can
>learn just as much as an adult.  They usually don't have time to do it,--

Exactly my point.  Even if a child did have the intelegence (ok obviously not
realistic for a 5 year old or something) they would not have the physical time
to learn enough to become proficent enough to do this kind of work.  Lets face
it.  Anything routine enough to not need a highly trained generalist would
probably be automated.


>  ---and our culture being prejudiced against youth, don't get the chance.  
>
>> All the normal routine things that kids could do (run errands, do routine
>> work, check E-mail for letters from certain people, etc)
>>
>No, you're wrong here.  That sentance should read "the things a kid would
>normally be ENCOURAGED to do".  I know a fellow that when he was in
>kindergarten he was programming assembler.  _I_ can't program in
>assembler.  At 10 he was doing trig.  _I_ can't do trig.  Why was he able
>to do such amazing feats?  Because he was given a chance to do them and he
>was ENCOURAGED to do them.  The only problem with children is that it
>takes time to learn things, and for the most complex things they're an
>adult before they're done learning about it.  TTYL!
>
>
>---
>Paul Anderson


Kelly