• ayyy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    (Disclaimer: this is not a fully formed counter-argument to your statement, merely my thought-vomit).

    As a kid growing up in the 90’s you wouldn’t believe the amount of times my parents and teachers vehemently insisted to me that I MUST do dictionary lookup drills because there’s no way I would just always have access to an electronic dictionary in my pocket. I was also told that I absolutely HAD to be fast at paper-based multiplication and long division. It’s not like I would just carry a calculator around with me everywhere I go, that would be insane!

    • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Knowing how to use a physical dictionary or do basic math in your head is absolutely still a good idea, your phone battery can die, your network connection can fail, and doing challenging things with your brain is good for your long term brain health anyway especially while it’s still developing.

      • tamal3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Maybe, but are there other things we can focus on? For example, as an ESL teacher, why do my newcomers only get a word to word paper dictionary on end of grade exams? I’m pretty sure the state of North Carolina just hates children? There’s literally no reason for this. Give them a digital dictionary.

        • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Paper is a renewable resource, rare metals used in computers aren’t, and the contents of the dictionary will be the same either way

          • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 hours ago

            That’s really not true. Paper production takes a lot of (often non-renewable) energy, ink usually consists of non-renewable chemicals, paper is often harvested from nonrenewable destruction of forests (especially in the US with Trump’s plans to cut down national forests), paper production belches a lot of pollution into the air and pollutes a lot of water, etc.

            • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              16 hours ago

              The energy can be obtained from renewable sources any time we decide to quit fucking around and make it happen, wood pulp can be replaced with hemp far more easily than that and requires less chemical treatment in the process. There are no similar options for mitigating the negative impact of mining or making our supply of those metals any bigger.

              • Zexks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                All of those metals can be recycled. You have no idea what you’re talking about.

                • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Recycling still consumes energy which can be just as non-renewable as the energy used for making paper, and the impact of mining is far greater than hemp farming even at its worst. Try harder.

          • tamal3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Yes but the process of obtaining the information is significantly more difficult. We can, you know, reuse the same 20 translation devices for years, and all kids have a laptop… I feel like you’re focused on the wrong thing.

            • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              No, it’s only more difficult for those without the skills to use the Index or Table of Contents in a book. Which is not really much of a difficult skill to learn. You pretty much need to know about alphabetical order and how one is at the front and the other is at the end of the book.

              • tamal3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Yes, but for a kid who is new to the country and who is taking a 3-4 hour test in English, a paper dictionary is an impediment. I’m not saying it should be illegal, but I know we can do better by these kids. (Honestly, my preference is for a newcomer with limited English to not even take this test at all their first year, but that’s not my choice.)

            • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              16 hours ago

              In what universe is an electronic device being handled by children going to last 20 years? Not ours