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

151–160 of 404 posts

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

#151

Post by PaulHoule »

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…

I know a lot of shops that hire good mechanics though if you want to get some work done on your car that requires difficult diagnostics often you have to wait days or weeks to get the attention of someone who can get it done.

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

#152

Post by prerok »

serial_dev wrote: post #131
kleiba wrote: post #94

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…

I don’t know what exactly they teach about AI, but trying out different AI tools could be very important, it’s a great learning tool if you want it to be. It can help students learn math, history, programming…

Indeed, but it's more like computer literacy not comp sci.

We also had a course in "computers" in high school. We had to know by heart the contents of "File" and "Edit" menus for Paint in Win3.1. Windows95 was just came out that year, so naturally the curiculum had not adapted yet. Anyway, guess how useful that was. The only one student who knew how to program got an F in the course :)

It was, of course, a way to teach nontechs how to use computers, as misguided as the material was. So, in that light, starting with AI makes sense. Would be nice to also include a bit more technical course, but apparently knowing where and when a poet was born is more important.

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

#153

Post by programmertote »

I generally agree with the thesis of the blog post.

I'd like to add that I feel frustrated when try out a screen at a museum and it not working (malfunctioning). I have been to NASA's Kennedy's Space Center (KSC) many times (like 5-6). Although they have got most of the exhibits working in good order, some of them are broken or not functioning well anymore. I still appreciate KSC (am an annual member), but I wish there is some philanthropist or the government fund to renovate these museums periodically...

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

#154

Post by BryantD »

elric wrote: post #86

I had a (now defunct) startup in this space some years ago. Maybe I can help shed some light on why things are the way they are. 1. Money. Most museums have no money. They either run on donations, on subsidies, or at the whim of wealthy patrons. They are very costly to run, especially the big ones. They are often in prime real estate areas, many require tight climate control, many also require specialised lighting to…

Good feedback. I wouldn't put "taking care" in quotes, however; my wife is a former museum worker and has graduate degrees in the field, and preservation is a key part of the role. Exhibits aren't just for the now, they're for the future. People would love to sit in the cockpit of the Bockscar bomber (little bit morbid, but true); allowing that would result in serious damage over time.

This is less important for educational spaces like the one the OP describes -- strictly speaking, science museums often aren't museums in the classical sense. Preservation is less important there, although not unimportant.

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

#155

Post by bigfishrunning »

gowld wrote: post #105
dcminter wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It drives me absolutely bananas that the "interpretation" (fancy museum word for "signs") at science museums is so parsimonious. Some fascinating device vital to the history of an important branch of science will have a brief paragraph about the person who invented it, nothing about what it's for, and then just a date and the device name. Often there's little or nothing further even in the museum shop. It's a crying…

I have a hobby of photographing scientifically incorrect explanations on placards at science museums. Usually found in smaller towns.

My favorite example of this is an exhibit that I saw at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh many years ago. There was a diorama of several forest animals, and an interface that shined lights on animals with different features. The "lays eggs" light shined on an assortment of animals including a Rabbit. Rabbits don't lay eggs, they only deliver them to good boys and girls.

We pointed this out to a worker that day. Several years later, we went back to see that the exhibit had not changed. I'm not sure if it's still there today.

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

#156

Post by BryantD »

mandevil wrote: post #119
crazygringo wrote: post #5

> But these physical exhibits require maintenance, and I was dismayed to see that several are in bad repair; some of them weren’t even working anymore, some seemed worn out, or didn’t seem well-designed to begin with. To be fair, that's what I remember children's museums being like in the 1980s as well. A significant number of exhibits would be temporarily out of order on any given day. I don't think screens are resp…

I was a tour guide at the National Air and Space Museum for a dozen years. I still remember seeing the exhibit plans the curators had, which called for a then 90-year old airplane (a Curtiss JN-4) to be mounted such that people could look down over it from the balcony. All of us docents who saw that immediately said "what about the kids who will drop pennies onto that precious canvas and wood thing to break it?" Six…

My wife worked in an aerospace museum for quite some time; I've heard a lot of similar stories.

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

#157

Post by CrazyStat »

kleiba wrote: post #94

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…

My wife and I toured our neighborhood public elementary school a couple years ago. Almost every classroom we passed the kids were staring at their chromebooks, even in the art room—digital art, I guess [1]. In the music room the kids were sitting at rows of desks with electronic keyboards and headphones while the teacher sat at the front of the class and gave them instructions through a microphone (to be heard through the headphones, I guess).

It was incredibly depressing. We decided to send our kids elsewhere.

[1] Nothing against digital art, but I strongly feel young kids should be working with actual physical materials.

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

#158

Post by stockresearcher »

jacobolus wrote: post #8
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.

Art museums could be made friendlier for kids, but they would need significant design and maintenance effort. In particular: many kids need a lot of running around, want to play with things with their hands, and get quickly bored just standing and looking at artworks. It would be nice if there were better art museums for kids though. (For what it's worth, there are plenty of non-interactive and thus boring-for-kids s…

The Art Institute of Chicago goes out of its way to be family friendly and not take itself too seriously [1], and it is consistently seen as one of the best art museums in the world.

PS - the Children’s Museum in Indianapolis is ridiculously good for kids.

[1] https://www.artic.edu/visit/whos-visiting/families-2

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

#159

Post by jimmydddd »

pklausler wrote: post #121
jimmydddd wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Went to the Frost Museum of Science in Miami. They had this big (6ft x 6ft) video display and four 6-inch diameter track balls where you guided a vessel through the virtual ocean or something. These two academic minded parents asked their sons (maybe 8 and 10 years old) to try the exhibit. They ran over excitely and just started pounding on the track balls with their fists as hard as they could. They of course did no…

Maybe the parents shouldn't let their offspring go feral on the exhibits?

Luckily, those track balls were rock solid and no worse for wear. The parents were very well intentioned and attentive and did quickly redirect the kids. But it was hilarious to see how much fun they were having before the parents stepped in. Like I bet they'll have great memories of the museum visit.

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

#160

Post by rdtsc »

GuB-42 wrote: post #47
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.

I think that science museums being places for kids is a good thing. The are the ones who benefit the most. If you want science for grownups, you have conferences. Also, that it is for kids doesn't make it impossible to enjoy as an adult, especially if it is about things you are unfamiliar with. Now, if you go to a science museum and think "only a kid can enjoy that". Then the problem is not that it is a place for kid…

> If you want science for grownups, you have conferences.

So if I want to learn more about electricity which conference is a good one to attend?

Post reply on HN