1
Assuming you're down to try, here's some basic stuff I need:
1) 15-20 minutes for a session zero, where we decide how to teach you. I'll give a plethora of options: e.g., I can be super theory heavy. Or I can emphasize practice with almost no theory. Or you can learn by watching me like a hawk. Or suggest your favorite path.
2) I need a way to get in touch. Discord's great for many many reasons, but if you really don't want to, offer an alternative that can be accessed through a personal computer. We'll need to voice chat as a minimum. Click on my profile for contact info or comment here.
For reasons why this whole thing may not be the best idea, see below:
a) I will ask you to give back in some way (but I'll let you choose how.) You could teach someone (not necessarily me) a skill you already possess. Or you could donate to keep my effort afloat. Or you could choose to decide a bit later. Something like that.
b) I mean to teach you how to teach a skill. This is not the Feynman technique; a skill to me is the ability to reach a specified result automatically and consistently.
c) I live in the Americas; if you're in Africa/Europe you're 6-7 hours ahead. If you're in Asia you're 12-16 hours ahead. (If Antartica, wtf are you doing there?) My schedules tend to be flexible but Asia-located people may struggle to get ahold of me.
If there's any other cons you can think of, leave them here, I'll respond in the comments if I agree.
Here's the thought. I have needed elements for learning a skill, what I call "the fundamentals of meta-learning," and I use them to create new ways to teach. For the next 3 months, I'd like to teach a course around them. They will help you learn skills faster and teach others better.
The course will include theory and practice. The theory consists of necessary conditions for learning a skill, backed with academic evidence. The practice may be students teaching or learning a skill of their choosing, with regular feedback sessions.
Here's a full proposal. Please read it! There's crucial info inside that will help you decide if it's worth it, including a proof of concept and how I plan to finance the project.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vd8AMOZrQUHsK5NVj05qPUa7cG6jOCnGdSUTXBX7Dfo/edit?usp=sharing
Thanks, lmk how it goes.
For instance:
Say I'm camping in the woods, and I want to start a fire. Knowing what's necessary, I look around me: my clothes can be fuel, and my glasses can concentrate the sun's heat. [2]
Do you see what I mean? When I want something to happen, I supply what's necessary. This lets me try new things and quickly learn why they work (or don't.) It's the fastest feedback loop I know.
Now say it's 1833. Humanity's tools for artificial light are candles, gas lamps, and fireplaces. They're expensive, inconsistent, and a fire risk. But if I play with what's necessary, I may notice that fire isn't needed for artificial light, so I place some fuel and heat in a vacuum.[3]
So: When I want something to stop, I suppress a necessary condition. That's a straight way to invent the electric light-bulb (based on nothing nobody's seen) and change civilization forever!
I hope it's clear that needs and causation are almost the same. Necessary is just a way to explain every solution that has worked or is yet to be invented for making or preventing what happens. Thus, it may be useful for learning to code.
So I entreat you, fellow hackers: what are things that happen to coders? I know bugs happen, so bugs have necessary conditions. We could invent a new way to debug. But I bet more things happen in computer science. What, though?
See you in the comments.
*Notes*
[1]: My version is oxidizer, enough fuel for a chain reaction, and heat at the fuel's flash point.
[2]: Oxygen will be in the air, of course.
[3]: The first practical light-bulb was electric current (heat), passing through a carbonized bamboo string (fuel), inside a vacuum tube.