> Humans who thrive in spatial and kinesthetic channels are debilitated on a modern computer.
Interesting; this isn't something I know anything about. Is it not feasible to develop alternative hardware and software that adapt our symbolic notations for these people, while still enabling those of us who practically require symbolic notations to collaborate?
In general, we're just not great at processing symbolic representations. We haven't evolved to do so (unlike spatial, visual, auditory, etc senses for matching representations) and have only manipulated symbols for a few hundred years. I mean true abstract symbols, not hieroglyphics or other old symbols that still mapped to language / were still quite visual.
I believe it could be more compelling to figure out how to re-represent things instead of just scaling up symbolic representations. That helps make it more powerful and accessible, for everyone.
A good example here that Bret mentions in his talk is Roman numerals -> Arabic numerals. Or even typing paragraphs of text to Arabic notation for equations (y = x^2 + 1 used to be PAGES of written text). People used to think only super educated elite mathematicians could grasp algebraic ideas. But after they were re-represented, we discovered almost all 8 year olds could grasp the ideas!
Interesting; this isn't something I know anything about. Is it not feasible to develop alternative hardware and software that adapt our symbolic notations for these people, while still enabling those of us who practically require symbolic notations to collaborate?