I use Duolingo to learn French, for a few years already. It definitely can bring you up to A1/A2-levels of proficiency (at least for French), which is definitely a solid starting point to engage with the language further. In my case, I've started to take weekly evening-courses. If I started another language, I probably would start again with Duolingo for the super basic stuff, then start to learn vocabulary with Anki, and then start with some paid, organized course that guides me through the more complex parts.
I still use Duolingo almost daily to have some continuous language exposure, for which I still find it useful (especially as the gamification helps with staying engaged). It has its limitations but it does help me. Just to give a bit of a counterpoint; I find your statement a bit overly broad.
I'm definitely by no means capable of giving proper advise here as it's been a long time since I've last interacted with kids of that age. But one anecdote:
When I was in the early teens (so quite a bit older than the kid in your case), I got my hands on a book about set theory, and it absolutely blew my mind. The concept of countability, axiomatic definition of functions and so on really gave me a completely different perception of math. Up until then, math seemed to be something that follows nature, so to speak, three plus two makes five because if I have three eggs and two eggs its five eggs or whatever primary school taught me. I remember back then that I'd wish that some teacher would have made me aware earlier of a more formal, axiomatic approach to math and all that, that there is a more fundamental basis to it than "that's just what it is". It really furthered my interest in math, and while I ultimately eventually moved over to CS, it definitely had quite a fundamental impact on me back then.
The particular book I've read was in German (I still have it) and unlikely to be ideal for a 5 year old; just wanted to give this little personal anecdote somewhat related to your question.
> Out of all of HN’s biases, the violent hatred of advertising is by far one of the most misguided.
Interesting, I perceive it exactly the other way around. I'm surprised this thread is as high up as it is, usually as per my perception, anti-advertisement sentiment gets shot down hard, presumably because a large part of the HN-crowd works for companies like google or facebook which rely on ads as a business model, or start-ups whose products are only used because users were shown ads for them.
My take: The human mind is hackable; it's just too easy and efficient to appeal to our emotions and most basic instincts. And while it was mostly fine to ignore it while it was "only" increasing consumerism, we currently see what happens when the same is applied to elections, with predictably terrible outcomes.
Your stance is still the old HN stance; the market actually works, any change that would impact the status quo is neither welcome nor needed, etc. etc. - this was the gospel for at least a decade, but we're finally awakening to the fact that hey, maybe this is actually bad, even if it made loads of money for many of us. Maybe it led us to the awful situation we're currently in, with big, ad-based monopolies, an absolute clownshow in the highest of offices and CEOs of said monopolies playing the lackeys.
Most big social developments in human history were non-serious and silly to many people before they actually happened.
Unlike other corporations, they actually didn't really do all that much to make it a monopoly though. It's kind of an organic monopoly simply by being better than everything else, by a wide margin.
There's not much "lock-in" apart from the games one owns on the platform; and the social aspects of steam are mostly negligible or niche - sure there's the friendlist, but no gamer I know uses steam voice-chat so the friendlist is mostly replicated in discord and similar anyway.
I don't see it as lock-in as you don't have to keep buying games from Steam - you can just buy games from other places if you want and then have multiple libraries.
And how many of these "game" services don't work with controllers.
For fucks sake, what decade is it?
I especially hate games that work 99% on Steam, but have a 1% issue with them requiring cookie banner dismissal (fuck you Rockstar) even after dealing with the logins.
Steam is just so much better than everyone else that they can have a cut of Rockstar and Electronic Arts money.
> As a matter of fact I'm of the opinion politics everywhere would be a lot better if plenaries, committees and hearings were not recorded or televised in the first place.
At that point we might as well get rid of the press, as otherwise someone might be able to hold someone actually accountable to their actions and decisions. Taking the argument ad absurdum, might even go back to monarchy so we don't have to deal with informed (or quasi-informed) voters to begin with.
I get where you come from, that the public perception of politics is mostly soundbite-driven is indeed a huge issue, in my opinion probably one of the biggest issues of our century, as it allows absolute incompetence a democratic pathway to power by playing to human basic instincts and emotions.
But as long as we want to cling to democracy, the voters _must_ have a way of knowing who is doing what, who is involved in which decision, and what favors are being traded. How else is a voter supposed to make an informed choice?
EDIT:
To address the soundbite-problem, I think systems that are more oriented towards consensus democracy (proportional elections, chance for referendums etc.) rather than competitive democracies (first past the post, majority takes all) are more stable against it. Election systems should favor choice of opinion rather than choice of persons, if that makes sense. I think especially the US (for context, I'm Swiss) would benefit a lot from such changes; right now it seems all outrage-driven.
> At that point we might as well get rid of the press, as otherwise someone might be able to hold someone actually accountable to their actions and decisions
Minutes are a thing, you know? And I'm not saying all sessions need to be held behind close doors, I'm perfectly fine with journalists or the public being present
> _must_ have a way of knowing who is doing what, who is involved in which decision
They do, that's what elections, roll calls and minutes are for
> and what favors are being traded
You're implying this is actually possible, it's not. Favours will always be traded in secret and deals made. All that the radical transparency proposals do is making sure that compromises can't be done effectively in official settings
Same here - it's really quite something. The future is looking good!
That being said, there are currently still some hurdles. Necessity for explicit file-extensions in the imports is definitely the big offender (it's invalid typescript syntax without the allowImportingTsExtensions-flag).
The trend is definitely clear though, most devs want ESM, most devs want types; it's just a matter of time until the ecosystem adapts. I suppose for types to finally land in the browser, TC39 will have to undergo the "progress is one funeral at a time"-principle, which will probably take another while.
This was my approach for my first few years of git. I always tried to approach git via its commands, and I horribly failed - until I finally took a little bit of effort to understand how git actually works under the hood, which really made it click for me.
For anyone who has ever spent a modicum of time (e.g. while getting a CS degree) trying to understand datastructures, it's probably really straight-forward to "get git". The datastructure underneath is really quite simple. A branch is a pointer to a commit, a commit is a pointer to a tree, a tree is a list of pointers to other trees and files. That's already pretty much all there is to it.
Once the datastructure of git is understood, the commands start to "make sense" on their own - at least most of them. They still have tons of obscure options that one doesn't realistically need in a daily work flow, but the general idea what the commands do (and how to recover from screwups) was, at least for me, pretty simple after understanding the datastructure.
As someone who doesn't really often look at these sort of charts... traffic coming via chatGPT being higher than Bing was quite the surprise to me. Makes of course total sense, but still astonishing to see the actual numbers in comparison.
I still use Duolingo almost daily to have some continuous language exposure, for which I still find it useful (especially as the gamification helps with staying engaged). It has its limitations but it does help me. Just to give a bit of a counterpoint; I find your statement a bit overly broad.
reply