Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

sethpurcell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 404 posts

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#91

Post by [deleted] »

kkylin wrote: post #58
parpfish wrote: post #4

One of my longstanding peeves is that art museums are treated as serious places for grown-ups but science museums and zoos are treated as places for kids.

Quite agree with the sentiment, and the presentation of science to the public in general. However, that probably also reflects a rather accurate assessment of scientific literacy in the general population on the part of planners. Anyway, among US museums of natural history & science, a prominent exception is the AMNH in NYC: yes there are things for kids, but also things for "grownups". After dozens of visits I still…

[deleted]

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#92

Post by tedggh »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #77
c22 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just museum exhibits and kids, it's everything . I have some maintenance roles in my background and the rate at which things like paper towel dispensers get worn down and completely destroyed when interacted with by hundreds or thousands of people a day is eye opening.

It's cus all skilled workers learned they can charge insane rates. Blue collar skilled labor starts at 100$ an hour in West Virginia or Mississippi now. Most of them, like Software, have learned that it's hard to figure out if the work they did was good or not until afterwards. As such, there are tons of charlatans, grifters, scammers, and related in many industries right now. Classic cases are Dentists (Literally ev…

It’s a supply and demand problem. There are just not enough people pursuing these jobs to replace the retiring generation. Some of these small family businesses are quite profitable, but most owners don’t have kids interested in continuing their legacy. Private equity noticed this and went on an acquisition spree. They buy your local HVAC and plumbing company, keep the family-owned branding “since 1976”, hire people with no experience to do the job and increase the hourly rate. They recover the investment, squeeze out every dollar they can and shut it down once bad Google reviews and lawsuits start to creep in.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#93

Post by ratelimitsteve »

>poked at one of these [design a rocket apps] with my son, added too many boosters to their launch vehicle, and were told it failed “for reasons” in a way she found totally unhelpful and pointless.

This is tripping my bullshit-o-meter. If it just failed "for reasons" how do you know it failed because there were too many boosters? Kinda sounds like the game explained that to them.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#94

Post by kleiba »

There is an incredible pressure on a lot of public facing endeavors to include digital, no matter whether it makes any sense at all or not. Take education, for instance - if it weren't such an important topic, it would be almost comical to observe how our schools are trying to jump through hoops to cram more IT into the classroom. (I wish the people responsible would take a look at Scandinavia though, where they are years ahead in that respect and have already begun taking digital devices out of the classrooms again.)

But it's not about what makes sense. It's about prestige, and about the ability to tell everyone "look at us, how forward we are!". This seems very clear to me, for instance, by the fact that the year 7 comp sci classes they teach in our local high school have what on their curriculum? Yep, that's right, you guessed it: AI. Because that's apparently the absolute basic CS that every student should start with these days.

Education is only one example, of course. But it's really creeping into everything. That museums have screen everywhere is no surprise. After all, flashing screen surely release more endorphins than non-interactive physical exhibits, so if you want to attract young folks, the pressure is on.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#95

Post by crab_galaxy »

I totally agree with the authors point. The Franklin Institute at its core is a place that teaches science through tactile experience and the special exhibits don’t reflect that.

Some context as a local though, the Franklin Institute’s special exhibit space rotates every couple of months and I imagine they’re put on by outside vendors who move the exhibit from venue to venue. The special exhibits for better or for worse more akin to Disney World or the pop culture museum in Seattle. I’ve been to a bunch of them and they’re usually quite good, but they don’t represent that tactile learning experience at all.

Many of us Philadelphians really lament that the place isn’t as well maintained as it should be. It was the field trip destination for so many kids and I’m sorry OP wasn’t able to recreate that same level of magic for their kids.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#97

Post by _DeadFred_ »

dlcarrier wrote: post #74

It's not a museum, unless there's a dark room with a bunch of mostly empty chairs lined up in front of a projection screen showing a slide show or documentary (or really both at the same time) with an overly enthusiastic narration covering the history of the subject. Sometimes you can't even get to the displays, without first at least walking through the room. Whenever I walk by the vaguely muffled sounds of someone…

A little too cold. Stimulating but also lulling you to sleep with it's proto ASMR. Your parents slightly frustrated that this is the point your choose to have an attention span.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#98

Post by AndrewLiptak »

Planktonne wrote: post #66
AndrewLiptak wrote: post #35

I work in a museum, so I'll add in a couple of cents. Seth isn't entirely wrong here: museums are good opportunities for hands-on activities and to see things in a real sensory way that you can't in other places. "I believe museums exist to present the real thing for the visitor to experience with their own senses" rings really true to me. That said: iPads and screens do have their place and it really depends on how…

> But you have to make sure that you're calibrating for your audience: most of the people using that likely won't have her experience or knowledge, and digging deeper and deeper into detail might be lost on most of their audience. I think this is a really key point; I've definitely felt slightly disappointed at certain exhibits, and had to remind myself that these things are designed for everyone. It would be lovely…

Something I've noticed with academics of all stripes is that they don't always recognize that not everybody shares their assumptions / views / insights / knowledge, and that's not a good mindset to go into building an exhibit or interactive.

You have to understand your audience, not design them. I frequently hear from folks who stop by our museum who tell me that they haven't been to ours since they were a kid, and they're generally not someone who keeps up with the field. I don't like the phrase "dumbing down", but it's something that we need to do in order to reach patrons.

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#99

Post by smj-edison »

AndrewLiptak wrote: post #35

I work in a museum, so I'll add in a couple of cents. Seth isn't entirely wrong here: museums are good opportunities for hands-on activities and to see things in a real sensory way that you can't in other places. "I believe museums exist to present the real thing for the visitor to experience with their own senses" rings really true to me. That said: iPads and screens do have their place and it really depends on how…

A bit of a tangent, but has modern maker culture made it easier to make and maintain exhibits? Things like 3D printing, version control, Arduinos, etc.

Thank you for all the work you do :)

Re: I didn't bring my son to a museum to look at screens

#100

Post by JumpCrisscross »

bluGill wrote: post #85
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> science museums being places for kids is a good thing. The are the ones who benefit the most I'm not sure how you can look at the current state of scientific literacy in America and conclude this. > art museums, the problem is that they are usually just exhibitions, and to be honest, that's boring, especially if you are a kid There are historical, thematic and philosophical aspects to art that make it beautiful bey…

> There are historical, thematic and philosophical aspects to art that make it beautiful beyond the aesthetic. Those are in the eye of the beholder though. In many cases they are things I still don't care about after learning about them. An ugly painting doesn't become any more interesting to me when I learn about the struggles the artist went through - a lot of people do find it more interesting - good for them, but…

> An ugly painting doesn't become any more interesting to me when I learn about the struggles the artist went through

Personal struggles? Sure. An ugly painting that opens the door to me learning about a war or revolution or system of government I was previously unaware of? Or a style or medium enabled by a new technology of the time? That can be fun.

I live near a large collection of wildlife art. I can't say many of them are beautiful. But noting how wolves have been portrayed over millenia, and across cultures, was a genuinely interesting exhibit. (In America, they went from ferocious creatues to essentially dogs. Most wolves in art today are not physiologically wolves. Akin to how most butterflies in art are dead.)

Post reply on HN