News

US President Obama: Games innovate technology, interest children in computer science
Posted: 15.02.2013 19:14 by JonahFalcon Comments: 18
During President Barack Obama's online Fireside Chat, the US leader stated that videogames often fuel technological innovation, as well as get children interested in the technological fields of science.

According to the President, "Look at Mark Zuckerberg. I was sitting next to him at dinner a couple of years ago, and he said he taught himself programming primarily because he was interested in games. If we set programs in high schools that engage kids because they get it, they won’t be just sitting there slouching in back of rooms while someone is lecturing.

"Given how pervasive computers and the internet is now, how integral it is in our economy, and how fascinated kids are with it, I want to make sure they actually know how to produce stuff and not simply consume stuff."


The Fireside Chat, sponsored by Google Plus, can be seen in the video below.

Source: Shacknews

Comments

By djole381 (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
djole381
Good guy Obama :)
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
SirRoderick
Alrighty then, he just got ranked a notch higher on the esteem-o-meter
By danfreeman (SI Core) on Feb 15, 2013
danfreeman
A politician who sees the good in gaming ? BULLSHIT !!!!

On a serious note i think this guy is really looking for supporters and realized the geek community is way bigger than the nutjobs who say gaming is bad so points for that.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 15, 2013
herodotus
What he doesn't understand, and what most adults over 40 don't either (and basically everyone over 21) is that for kids just starting out in Primary School (5-6yo) most of the jobs/careers they will engage in when they finish haven't even been created yet.
Imagine that for a moment.
By JonahFalcon (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
JonahFalcon
General sciences will always be there (biology, physics, computer, etc.) That's the point.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 15, 2013
herodotus
Yes, but he's merely stating the obvious and trying to garner support from the game-playing masses. It's typical, and transparent, politicking. Good on him though.

It's a shame we didn't have an equal, or even equivalent politician here. Here they're all ratbags stuck in the Victorian Age, without the unique inquisitiveness of that time.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 15, 2013
herodotus
**Pop Quiz**:
What was the Church's response to Darwin's "The Origin Of The Species..." when it was first released?
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
SirRoderick
Considering that Old Earth theory must have been pretty much accepted theory by then, I'm assuming that bit of the book didn't upset anyone but the fanatics that believed in the 6 day creation and all that. As for the concept of evolution itself...I'm gonna go ahead and say "no biggie" as the official response. It's not inherently atheïstic, it just posits that the way species come about is over long periods of gradual change, plenty of room for a creator.

Same as with geology basically :)

Am I close?
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 15, 2013
herodotus
Actually the Church of England, the Catholic Church, in fact all mainstream Religions supported the Theory of Evolution - it was part of God's plan.
What they didn't agree with was Darwin's belief that Nature was cruel and uncaring. That they could not abide by.
So yes, Roderick, basically you're correct.

All of the denouncing of Evolution today based on Religious beliefs is only a very recent phenomenon, aside from being overly stupid and ignorant.
People tend to forget that many scientists actually do believe in a God as there is just too much they cannot explain with Science, Physics or Maths.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
SirRoderick
Just to be fair though, most scientists don't. There is a clear bias in the academic world towards agnostic atheism. The reason for that is all the stuff that CAN be explained with the scientific method, casts a bright light on the religious beliefs so to speak.

Hold on, let's stop before this turns into a full on religious debate, we know how those end up :P
By JonahFalcon (SI Elite) on Feb 15, 2013
JonahFalcon
The point is, the President's words have weight, and he effectively slapped the wrists of those like CNN who immediately say, "Videogames did it! Evil!" whenever something bad happens.

And just so you know, he can't run for President again. He's on his second term.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 15, 2013
herodotus
Send him down here. I'll vote for him as Prime Minister (far better than the present one and the idiot opposition leader).
By Kres (SI Elite) on Feb 16, 2013
Kres
I knew he is a good guy. Obviously knows what he's doing.
By unsilviu (SI Core) on Feb 16, 2013
unsilviu
Of course he's a supporter of gaming- doing otherwise, siding with the crazies would damage US-Polish bilateral relations, since he'd be saying that the Witcher 2 copy given to him by the Polish president is a tool to turn people into murderers.

(I don't really think that's his reasoning, of course)
By Hammerjinx (SI Veteran Member) on Feb 16, 2013
Hammerjinx
While Australian law doesn't require the PM to be born here, I don't think there's a lot in it for Obama. US Ex-Presidents can typically look forward to a cushy position on the board of a corporation that pays many times more than what we pay our PM. There's a certain amount to be said for shaping the course of history, but going from US Pres to Aussie PM would have to be like going from being a uni professor to a highschool sports teacher. An Australian highschool sports teacher.

Endorsing the games industry is a good move at this point. The US is in real danger of having a tremendous STEM shortage in the future, and they need to be taking steps to address this in primary and secondary schools now.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Feb 17, 2013
herodotus
Big fish in a small pond, while retaining a dual citizenship, and receiving all benefits as an (ex) President (they're always President, whether in office or not), might appeal. Better that than the Dictator/Hand-puppet we have now, or the complete dickhead idiot in opposition. He'll destroy us.

I fear for this country come the elections, I really do.
Labor copped a huge backlash here in Queensland, and rightfully so (even tho I've been a Labor man all my life) in the last state elections. However, I knew the opposition leader as an idiot and that that would come out when he got in (there was never any "if").
Guess what: he is!
Now Queenslanders are collectively tearing their hair out over the fool, as more of his ministers resign or are sacked and he sits there like the weasel maggot he is miming platitudes while planning to destroy The Great Barrier Reef (didn't think we'd notice that sly move, did ya Campbell?).

The same will happen if Tony Idiot gets in at the Federal level. As has been described about "A:CM" - game over man, game over.

So once more: please Mr. President, come on down!
By JonahFalcon (SI Elite) on Feb 17, 2013
JonahFalcon
"US Ex-Presidents can typically look forward to a cushy position on the board of a corporation that pays many times more than what we pay our PM"

Not Jimmy Carter. The man is tireless with his Habitat for Humanity. He never takes those cushy speaking engagements.
By Hammerjinx (SI Veteran Member) on Feb 18, 2013
Hammerjinx
Gillard's a bit of a wet sock, too afraid to do much of anything other than rib Abbott incase she loses a minister and subsequently the government.

Abbott is a ridiculous turd, and I'm not sure when or why people decided he'd be an acceptable PM.

I'd like to think that Gillard would have the courage to get her shit together if they got a convincing win, but I doubt it.