The 9-year-old Microsoft genius - CNN.com
:D
Printable View
Absolutely amazing kid.Quote:
Originally Posted by happyclown
It's good to know that people are getting on this world younger, because as they grew, they will already have a lot of knowledge.
I was 11 years old when I started, and now I'm very good, principally with Assembly. :)
I always like hearing about the possibility that there could be people smarter than me in the world. :D
Now we just have to show young Marco some other OS. I see teenage rebellion on the horizon.
Wow, must you be living a fairly happy life then! ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
I think the technical term is Intelligent, not smart. They are more intelligent.
It's a harder pill to swallow, but you have to take it. It's for you own good, says mum.
For a couple of years I consciously choose not to use the term or concept "intelligence"* in speech or thought, wrt to normal human adults. That is, I refused to accept the idea that some range of inate intelligence among people was an explanation for anything, such as differing beliefs, behaviour, abilities, etc. It's not that hard to do, but you do have to pay attention to when you are applying it in your mental judgements and evaluations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario F.
I don't totally believe that but I think it is a fairly enlightening perspective and generally leads to "truer" understandings, if I were a school teacher I might actually enforce it in my classes.
* or the inverse, "stupid", so if I or someone did something stupid I could not blame it on that person's or my stupidity.
Another issue as well that every news agency fails to mention is intelligence != maturity. They are trying to convey one thing to their audience and they do it well while ignoring other issues that clearly are prevalent and do not make the 'kid' an adult by any means.
Haven't tried doing without the concept of "maturity", I think that would actually be much harder.
I think I know what you mean. I use it when I'm trying to explain why I'm not so stupid as people say. And immediately revert to the other form when I'm explaining why I am so great.Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
Ok... seriously now:
The word is more meaningful than it seems to me you want imply. And it is really a stretch to not see in these extreme cases a clear sign of intelligence above the normal. It can be or not properly developed during growth. But I think that's an entirely different matter. Clearly this kid (and others alike) show an incredible potential as far as their ability to use their brain is concerned. Some of them reach adulthood still with this evident sign and go on to do great things.
However, I do agree that it probably just reveals a superior ability to use our brains, and not necessarily a better brain... if I make myself understood. I also agree there's a tendency to confuse adult-like behavior with an higher sign of intelligence. This is even a part of the social agenda of any parent.
But In any case, I do not fear using the word Intelligence. Least we gain yet another prejudice. I think we have enough of that already.
I love how society constantly tells young ones they are specially gifted and what have you and all only for them to get into the workforce and into the real world and realize they are yet another rat in a giant rat race.
Oh I do believe in it. The purpose of my "experiment" was to help me decide how significant it is and the extent to which my evaluation of others as lacking intelligence was masking a truer perception of behaviour and motivation. The fact that it was not hard to do completely without out it is pretty interesting IMO, and helped me to understand other people better. They are not as dumb as I thought, they are just working within different paradigms. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Mario F.
So my conclusion was that it was clouding my perception, thus I still try to think that way as much as possible, which is to say, I believe the "normative" prejudice makes relative intelligence a much more significant factor than it really is (because the concept of intelligence is usually applied stupidly, and to excess, forestalling a more "intelligent" or mindful contemplation).
Wisdom is definitely not the same thing. For that the kid does need linux.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba
I think my problem is not so much avoiding intelligence the word, but figuring out what smart means. When I give that compliment, I am not looking into your IQ score.
IQ test are a funny thing. They are about puzzles and are almost non-verbal, and this is supposed to be an accurate reflection of your innate intelligence as opposed to a skill set you possess.
But if you are a kid that plays alone with lego a lot, or rule-oriented games (alone or socially), you will probably do better on an IQ test than some kid who lives in one room with a family of five on a commune where non-structured social/inter-personal activity would take up most of your time. Does that mean kid A is truly smarter than kid B? Obviously not. Does it mean kid A's intelligence has been developed, environmentally, better than kid B? I don't believe that either. But it does mean that kid A will do better on an IQ test.
Which is a good example of what I meant by a misuse of the concept as an explanation. Kid A is not necessarily more intelligent because he has a higher IQ. Kid A is just better at certain kinds of puzzles.
Wow, I can't believe it took 12 posts before someone mentioned the L word. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MK27
Heheh, but in Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond does argue that:Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
Quote:
Besides this genetic reason, there is also a second reason why New Guineans may have come to be smarter than Westerners. Modern European and American children spend much of their time being passively entertained by television, radio, and movies. In the average American household, the TV set is on for seven hours per day. In contrast, traditional New Guinea children have virtually no such opportunities for passive entertainment and instead spend almost all of their waking hours actively doing something, such as talking or playing with other children or adults. Almost all studies of child development emphasize the role of childhood stimulation and activity in promoting mental development, and stress the irreversible mental stunting associated with reduced childhood stimulation. This effect surely contributes a non-genetic component to the superior average mental function displayed by New Guineans.
Sure, but if the New Guineans selected some children to be raised in a special cave together where they were not exposed to the other children or society at large, and instead played highly structured competitive puzzle solving games, applying the same philosophy WRT to the importance of continuous activity/simulation, I bet those kids would have an even higher IQ than the normal (still quite smart) New Guineans, but they would make poor leaders and probably not understand a lot of things that went on around them.
I notice there is a three hour pbs doc about this book on youtube, looks interesting. Lots of exotic locales. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by laserlight
I'm not convinced that intelligence can be taught. So, at first glance I would tend to dismiss your argument, Mk.
Indeed. And not always exactly a compliment.Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteflags
I agree. I think it is a purely innate, natural quality that is produced by human genetics. You can teach a goldfish as carefully as you like, it will never posses human intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario F.
That's also why I think:
1) there is not nearly as much variation amongst normal human adults as is usually presumed (and implied by inexact measurements such as IQ). IQ is probably a decent concept, but it is completely abstracted from biological/neurological issues and relies on some culture bound evaluations.
2) because of #1, using the term relatively (more and less intelligent) is deceptive and usually inaccurate. You are now talking about something else, such as the skills an individual acquired, and also probably ignoring a huge range of contextual factors.
Since this kid is a M$ systems engineer, does anyone know if it's actually legal for a company to employ a 9 year old?
Is he really an employable systems engineer, or it really just pieces of paper until he can legally work to earn a salary?
EDIT: Actually, I remember seeing an episode of Oprah about 15 years ago, and they had child geniuses on the show. And there was a 14 year old who was legally working as a doctor. Can't remember what the others worked at, but they were in their teens.
I guess that give the saying "Looks like a 9 year old made Windows" meaning :)
Good thing for us, experience and system engineers go hand-in-hand with regards to making a good system engineer. Writing a 300 odd page book, tell me there isn't someone behind the scenes pushing him?
Yet another arrogant Ph.D on the way ;)
I think that was an end user manual for Windows 7. A 300 page end-user manual for Windows 7 most likely has < 50 pages of actual text in it. Also, the kid speaks three languages, and presuming the book was not written in English, a lot of it was probably more or less translation/regurgitation.Quote:
Originally Posted by zacs7
Not to put that down -- probably the book is useful for some group of people somewhere. I remember reading "Foundations of GTK+ Development" and being a little shocked that the author, Andrew Krause, does not appear to be an adult in his photo :p Then somewhere inside it says Andrew will be using the proceeds to start paying his way thru College next year.
I'm sure that Mr. Krause is a better programmer than I am and there's nothing wrong with the book, although almost anyone could have written it. It did make me wonder a little about the economics of the publishing industry. They churn out quite a number of fat programming oriented books that probably have near guaranteed sales on a certain level, if, as in the case of the GTK book, if they fill a niche, but the amount of such sales is going to also have guaranteed limits -- you will not find such things breaking onto the NY Times best seller list or something. So the cost of producing them must be kept pretty low.
Hmm...I wonder what under-documented API's there are out there that I could whip a few hundred pages up on...
We need to just accept people for whatever pace they develop at. I am 24 and I still eat glue sticks and stomp my feet when I don't get my way. And I like ice cream.
Geez, the military did wonders for you, Bob. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by BobMcGee123
ROFL!Quote:
Originally Posted by SlyMaelstrom
You two made my day.
Hehe. Welcome back, Bob. Not sure where you went but good to have you back.
Things that are wrong with him:
1) obsessed with Microsoft. It's too bad his indoctrination is already well entrenched.
2) ponytail
3) how exactly did he come to be a Microsoft systems engineer already? Resume much?
The segment seemed to be spun that way. There really is no telling whether or not he spoke about other operating systems as the network could simply edit the interview to suit their plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by nonoob
Does any 9 year old actually pick their own hair style?Quote:
Originally Posted by nonoob
It's a certification (they said he had three) which does not have an age restriction to get. Jealous much?Quote:
Originally Posted by nonoob
A worthless one at that, if you're going for non-Microsoft based jobs :-).Quote:
Originally Posted by SlyMaelstrom
1. It's not overly hard to get Microsoft Certified, they really just want your money.
2. My dog could "do it", it can be done online.
Propaganda much? :) Personally, I'd rather a childhood than a few certifications at 9. Too bad he doesn't have any life experience to make him any useful as an employee.
Oh, C'mon! They are fabricating news now? I don't think we reached that low. Neither it seems possible for mother and child to have faked this.
Just leave the kid alone. He's smart and intelligent. More than any of us at his age. Deal with it.
O_oQuote:
Just leave the kid alone. He's smart and intelligent.
So all the other nine year old geeks who pursued interests other than "Microsoft Windows 7" with the same fascination and dedication are losers?
I know a couple of seven year old twins with an almost encyclopedic knowledge of mythology. Are they "smart and intelligent", average kids, or idiots?
o_OQuote:
More than any of us at his age.
What does age have to do with it? Would a eight year old who knew the same kit be smarter or more intelligent? What about a ten year old?
What is the "cutoff" for age being an issue? Will this kid still be worth discussing when he is 13? 19? 30?
Soma
Smart and intelligent. More than I was at their age. Probably more that you are at their age. So? What's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomotap
According to my studies it's right there at your age. When you start making questions like that, you lost it.Quote:
What does age have to do with it? Would a eight year old who knew the same kit be smarter or more intelligent? What about a ten year old?
What is the "cutoff" for age being an issue? Will this kid still be worth discussing when he is 13? 19? 30?
One does not necessarily follow from the other, you are actually the first one to think about it this way AFAICT.Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomotap
Really? All it takes is the ability to memorize and regurgitate a few facts? All the "idol worshipers" who know the statistics of a hundred baseball players are "smart and intelligent"? All the "Pokemon" fanatics who've memorized a few dozen equations are "smart and intelligent"? How do you decide which facts are important? How do you decide how many facts are necessary?Quote:
Smart and intelligent.
I told you that they have an excellent memory and a fascination for mythology. Calling them "smart and intelligent" because of their age is an insult.Quote:
So? What's your point?
I may have been all of five years old when I started questioning praise for "gifted" people.Quote:
According to my studies it's right there at your age.
LMAO!Quote:
When you start making questions like that, you lost it.
I get to appreciate the skills, wisdom, and intelligence people cultivate regardless of age without masturbating over an average kid with a technical bend. I don't have to insult curiosity, fascination, and dedication with "aren't you special". Boy am I glad I lost "it"!
Soma
> I don't have to insult curiosity, fascination, and dedication with "aren't you special".
Indeed you don't. You just have to be generally insulting.
Well, we were all questioning a lot of things at the turn of the century.Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomotap
My opinion is that phantomotap is way to smart for all of us and, frankly, trying to take in all of the wisdom he has provided in this thread has bored me like a hillbilly trying to watch a chess match. We should all just give up.