Ask Slashdot: How Do You Teach Inventing To Kids? 137
dryriver writes: Everybody seems to think these days that kids desperately need to learn how to code when they turn six years old. But this ignores a glaring fact -- the biggest shortage in the future labor market is not people who can code competently in Python, Java or C++, it is people who can actually discover or invent completely new and better ways of doing things, whether this is in CS, Physics, Chemistry, Biology or other fields. If you look at the history of great inventors, the last truly gifted, driven and prolific non-corporate inventor is widely regarded to be Nikola Tesla, who had around 700 patents to his name by the time he died. After Tesla, most new products, techniques and inventions have come out of corporate, government or similar structures, not from a good old-fashioned, dedicated, driven, independent-minded, one-person inventor who feverishly dreams up new things and new possibilities and works for the betterment of humanity.
How do you teach inventing to kids? By teaching them the methods of Genrikh Altshuller, for example. Seriously, does teaching five to seven year olds 50-year-old CS/coding concepts and techniques do more for society than teaching kids to rebel against convention, think outside the box, turn convention upside down and beat their own path towards solving a thorny problem? Why does society want to create an army of code monkeys versus an army of kids who learn how to invent new things from a young age? Or don't we want little Nikola Teslas in the 21st Century, because that creates "uncertainty" and "risk to established ways of doing things?"
How do you teach inventing to kids? By teaching them the methods of Genrikh Altshuller, for example. Seriously, does teaching five to seven year olds 50-year-old CS/coding concepts and techniques do more for society than teaching kids to rebel against convention, think outside the box, turn convention upside down and beat their own path towards solving a thorny problem? Why does society want to create an army of code monkeys versus an army of kids who learn how to invent new things from a young age? Or don't we want little Nikola Teslas in the 21st Century, because that creates "uncertainty" and "risk to established ways of doing things?"
Let me finish that sentence for you (Score:5, Insightful)
"a good old-fashioned, dedicated, driven, independent-minded, one-person inventor who feverishly dreams up new things and new possibilities and works for the betterment of humanity.
Re:Let me finish that sentence for you (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You should probably look up the definition of the word "behest".
I don't see why, his use of the word seems entirely forthright to me.
Re: (Score:3)
I rolled my eyes when TFS listed Tesla as the perfect inventor. He made a few useful inventions in AC power transmission. The rest of his patents were crap. Tesla is WAY overrated.
Re:Let me finish that sentence for you (Score:5, Insightful)
I rolled my eyes when TFS listed Tesla as the perfect inventor. He made a few useful inventions in AC power transmission. The rest of his patents were crap. Tesla is WAY overrated.
The whole summary is a bit of a silly rant. The reason I learned to paint and to make music in school is not because I have any hope whatsoever of becoming an artist, designer or a musician. The basic ability to paint is useful occasionally and I am just above the level where I can do a wall in a house. Most importantly, I have some small appreciation of the level of skill and knowledge that artists are deploying. In the same way, someone who's tried programming but never became a professional programmer just has a basic understanding of a bunch of things they wouldn't otherwise understand. What's a bug? How does a programmer end up making a bug in something as simple as time? How can the computer possibly not understand english? When you actually tried programming these questions become transformed and you just can't have as much wool pulled over your eyes. None of this has anything to do with inventors at all and none of it stops other people inventing.
Re: (Score:3)
I rolled my eyes when TFS listed Tesla as the perfect inventor. He made a few useful inventions in AC power transmission. The rest of his patents were crap. Tesla is WAY overrated.
The whole summary is a bit of a silly rant.
Worse than just a rant, much of it is sheer stupidity:
" ...than teaching kids to rebel against convention"
Convention is usually convention for a good reason. People that rebel against "convention" as a matter of practice are fools. Against "conventional medicine"? Good luck with your health-food based cancer treatment. Hope your affairs are all in order for your kids' sake.
Much of this stuff is revolt against reality because some influencers in the culture would assure you that it's all a conspiracy, and th
The Healthiest, Anti-Cancer Foods: G-BOMBS (Score:2)
https://www.drfuhrman.com/elea... [drfuhrman.com]
"G-BOMBS is an acronym that you can use to remember the best anti-cancer, health-promoting foods on the planet. These are the foods that you should eat every day, making up a significant proportion of your diet. They are extremely effective at preventing chronic disease, including cancer and promoting health and longevity."
Reversing cancer is much more problematical than preventing it though... And even Dr. Fuhrman will say that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Tesla invented the AC motor. If you consider that just a "useful invention in AC power transmission", you haven't paid attention.
Most of his inventions were in fact overrated, but that doesn't dismiss that his singular insight created the reason to even want to transmit AC power.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually many of his other patents were substantial improvements in AC generators and motors. He was belatedly recognized as beating Marconi to the punch with radio transmissions.
I'm not sure what's up with the near mystical qualities some attribute to him, but his body of work was substantial.
Re:Let me finish that sentence for you (Score:4, Insightful)
Edison's greatest invention was the Research and Development Lab.
Re: (Score:2)
so you're familiar enough with all seven hundred or so of Tesla's patents to dismiss the vast majority out of hand
you sound just like an Edison ;~)
Edison was better. He made things that people actually found useful and wanted to buy.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck. This is a retread of trying to get more money into the education of intellectual elites, shown to pay for itself, but not done because "elites".
It's just cleverly couched in terms of everyone, but the spark of cleverness, so to speak, isn't a thing for training.
There was a study some years back that showed the top programmers were 4x as productive as the average ones. Perhaps more importantly, there were things the top programmers could do the average ones couldn't, no matter how much time they
Re: (Score:2)
A person having good health, a sane mental outlook and good personal finances will have a better chance of becoming elite and more likely to attain higher education.
Many of us don't have all those things in aces and it makes working up to elite and highly educated much more difficult, if not impossible.
Kids should be teaching inventing to us (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids should be teaching inventing to us. Quite often they see things that we don't.
Re: (Score:1)
Out of the mouths of babes...
Re:Kids should be teaching inventing to us (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a 1972 book called Children solve problems by Edward de Bono [wikipedia.org] that is a masterpiece of children's lateral thinking. It is a compendium of solutions - sometimes humorous - by children of a range of ages. I often refer to it when I have a mental-block with a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids should be teaching inventing to us. Quite often they see things that we don't.
Can you name a few significant inventions made by children?
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Children invent games, words, and reinvent technology and society as they learn and expand on what they've learned. The bright ones discover mathematics, logic, and philosophy. The foolish ones re-invent genders.
Re: (Score:3)
Done? You should be, it's a very short list.
Children may notice things you don't, but because they're looking harder at something that's brand new to them and boringly familiar to you. They are not sources of unfettered brilliance, they're ignorant and naive. On rare occasions, ignorance and naivete can lead one to notice something new, but more often than no
Re: Kids should be teaching inventing to us (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the short way of saying that is "children don't monetize their ideas"
In short... (Score:4, Insightful)
A Child's Left Behind ? (Score:2)
Is this how? (Score:2)
Society doesn't care (Score:2)
Why does society want to create an army of code monkeys versus an army of kids who learn how to invent new things from a young age?
Quite simply because society is afraid of the "uncertainty" and "risk" you referred to.
I'm not saying it's right; that's just how it as at the moment. Sadly it will take a lot of people with passion in order to change it.
Re: Society doesn't care (Score:2)
afraid of the "uncertainty"
Society is ascared of non-uniformity and people who ask questions based on critical thinking.
Society would rather that you keep your head down, toe the party line, know your place in regards to your betters. As the Japanese say, "The nail that stands up, gets hit".
How Do you Teach Kids to be taller? (Score:2)
Right... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Kickstarter appears to be mostly, a marketing platform; 'discover' some useless piece of junk from China, slap on a brand name, produce an applesque video, market it as a project that requires backing, all with some person who makes themselves out as the next James Dyson, and then just fulfil the orders. Considering how many actual projects end up failing, I'm not surprised the kickstarter company doesn't mind having ready goods marketed as a startup project in order to dilute the failures.
Today's 'inventor
Re: (Score:3)
Edison founded 14 companies full of employees (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly encourage my 5 year old to problem-solve and think things through. To try to come up with creative solutions.
That's not INSTEAD OF the skills that are needed for a white-collar job, or some "good" job. Thomas Edison was one inventor - who employed 14 companies full of employees, draftsmen, machinists, engineers, etc who had the learned practical skills.
I used to think of myself as the lone-wolf entrepreneurial type, I invented and developed things and founded some small companies based on my creations. I did that for a number of years. Then I tried doing just the part I enjoy, in a much larger organization - where someone else did the accounting, dealt with the insurance companies, did sales, etc. It turns out that like most people, I like that better and I'm better at doing just the part I'm good at. Most people have work they enjoy more than they enjoy the hassles of running a company, being on their own.
Reading Books About Inventors? (Score:3)
Seems to be a pretty good collection these days: Best Sellers in Children's Inventors Books [amazon.com]
I object to the premise (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I object to the premise (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Any carpander can code, amiwrite?
Re: (Score:2)
First, let's answer the question ---- why should we teach "inventing" across the board to all our children?
Because there's a group of quota-minded people out there that want to remake the world to their liking, and they're outraged that there aren't enough people ticking the boxes in the categories they've dreamed up for their ideal world. So, the solution is to MAKE people go live in those boxes. THEN things will be perfect.
Because of schedules and costs. (Score:2)
Seriously - it's because of schedules.
You can have extracurricular rewards for attending inventors fairs and the like, but you can't put invention on a timetable for a grade the same way you can grade programming knowledge.
Deadline for a contest is fine - but the schedule of a set of lesson plans is a bit too much for truly diverse invention process.
Inventors fairs and the like work because you're just competing for an arbitrary ribbon, not any punishment or reward for your grade average or anything.
That, a
You Don't (Score:4, Interesting)
Kids are incredibly inventive by themselves, without outside intervention. There's no reason whatsoever to promote the teaching of "inventiveness". What you do is encourage their existing creativity to flourish.
We need to focus on stopping the suppression of creativity. Rote learning, endless standardized tests, and massive quantities of homework all work to kill creativity. More recess and breaks, more art, and redirecting learning materials towards critical thinking and away from memorization are what we need. These will hardly teach creativity, but will avoid killing it.
Re: You Don't (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
> Kids are incredibly inventive by themselves, without outside intervention.
Might I point out that they're also quite capable of igniting the cat, the curtains, and a tinder dry urban neighborhood in a drought area. A certain amount of simple safety guidance is to everyone's benefit, even if children see it as "suppressing their creativity".
Re: (Score:2)
Easy PZ (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Easy PZ (Score:2)
Probably quite the opposite actually (your comment about stuff, ignoring the pyro jest). Children with less stuff focus more and play more imaginatively with what they have. Boredom also leads to creativity, so donâ(TM)t pack their time with activities and screen time. If you want to give children stuff, give them your time, it means way more to them.
First, find out how to invent things (Score:5, Insightful)
Your question is perhaps no different than asking how to write good poems and/or novels, make music, commission artwork, or something else that's abstract but has no absolute path that works.
The most I've seen is brainstorming ideas. Cheap and easy to create, but without substance until someone acts on them. And even if someone comes up with an idea about cell phones, they're not going to be invented using medieval tech either.
There's also dysfunctional inventions, for example, a "new" way to store energy using gravity by using a crane and bricks (when there's already a hydroelectric resevoir that's already invented).
For inventing things like new pharmaceutical drugs, those have an extremely rigorous filter, that makes the general question rather pointless in comparison to the specific field.
By giving them time space to be bored! (Score:5, Insightful)
"invent"... and then what? (Score:3)
it is people who can actually discover or invent completely new and better ways of doing things
errr and then they should get a patent, only to find that it costs USD 20,000 or greater to file and protect? or, they should not patent it, and get sued?
or, they should pay tens of thousands of dollars on a prototype, take it to corporations to demo it, only to have the corporations either rip it off (despite formerly-mentioned patents), let them find out for themselves that their invention threatens the oil industry (if it's more efficient for transportation) or the concrete industry (if it improves quality of life in cities) ... need i go on?
i'm sorry to appear to be so pessimistic here: i'm outlining that the problem isn't the lack of inventions, it's that the markets are established in Western countries with interests (anti-interests, more like) that stack the deck *against* introducing disruptive ideas.
now, if the article was about "how could someone with a disruptive idea or invention get it to the world" i would be much more interested to see responses to that kind of question.
This seems silly, on the face of it (Score:2)
I seriously doubt you can "teach inventing". You can teach a lot of useful peripheral skills to children who already have a bent for creativity and invention - but you can't magically convert the average kid into an inventor.
And, seriously, teaching them to rebel and defy convention? Kids come by that naturally. Somebody claiming they can do that is just trying to hold onto a sweet, easy gig.
You dont "teach" IQ (Score:1)
For the rest of the students educate at a rate they can understand.
Re "rebel against convention"? Thats 100's of years of useful maths and decades of computer science.
Re ""risk to established ways of doing things?"" the smart people who design open source browsers to show more ads?
Read up on Nikola Tesla. He understood math.
Read up on Charles Proteus Steinmetz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Study more.
You Don't (Score:3)
One of the best methods of inventing or innovating for that matter is to know very little about something to start.
While this might seem counter intuitive (" We need our best minds on this" ) it actually isn't , at least not always.
The logic being , the less you know about something the less you know about all of the accepted constraints that all those that came before you have placed. The boundaries, the you can't do that's, the that will never works.
This can set a mind free. Sure , you may well discover on your own what is possible and what is not. But you may also see something that others have missed or misinterpreted.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. Can you cite some examples where ignorance has helped an inventor?
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. Can you cite some examples where ignorance has helped an inventor?
Mathematics is replete with auto-didacts that added to the field, just google mathematicians + autodidact.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're making a causal claim based on statistics, it would be useful to know how many mathematicians are autodidacts.
This must be international... (Score:2)
There's no point in teaching seven year olds computing... they can't touch this stuff until they're 13 due to COPPA.
Forget how to teach it ... just don't kill it (Score:3, Insightful)
Best way to kill creativity is to punish it. If little Morgan gets the right answers to the math problem don't grade him/her down when they don't use Today's Authorized Method of Computation.
Start at pre-school and ... (Score:3)
... stop killing their imagination.
One of the primary tasks for a pre-school or k teacher is to prepare them for grade school, which generally means make kids conform. Children are naturally inventive but we don't like independent thinkers when we need everyone in class to sit still and do what they are told. So we kill non-conformity.
Inventions everyfreakinwhere. (Score:2)
To join the 'wtf' crowd... the presence or absence of 'lone inventors' is not a reliable metric of innovation. Millions of people putter and tinker and invent simultaneously right now. There are a ludicrous stack of in-my-lifetime inventions just behind slashdot or any other tech thing. Browser, frontend code, backend code, their languages, every OS, protocols, the systems, chips, drives, networking gear, other electronics...
Now look at the inventions driving every major tech company until you hit the 21st
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. People are looking for the next "tech hero" and they don't realize they are all around us.
Systems Engineering (Score:2)
Vetting & tuning is harder than generating (Score:5, Informative)
I disagree. New ideas are plentiful and cheap. The hard part it vetting them for practicality, marketability (convincing people to try it), and tuning it via R&D and actual road testing.
I have proposed what I think are grand table-centric ideas: Dynamic Relational, Factor Tables for AI (see my sig below), and Table Oriented Programming.
But they do need to be implemented well enough to test the concept in multiple situations. Nobody knows how long it will take to verify the ideas are useful or practical (for somebody who doesn't necessarily think like me), and work the kinks out. I do continue to tinker, but would need to retire to "do it right".
Universities, entrepreneurs, and OSS experimenters have competing suggestions and hunches to work on so they have to be selective. Usually they go with relatively safe bets: something similar to existing successful products or ideas, not outliers nor pie in the sky.
The real bottleneck is insufficient implimentors, tuners, and testers of the "odder" unproven ideas.
The piano was invented by a musical instrument tinkerer, Bartolomeo Cristofori ("Bart"), who was funded by a prince who had to means and whimsy to pay him to tinker with hunches. The clavichord had the nice feature that one can control the volume of the notes based on how hard you press a key. However, it's too quiet for large room performances. The harpsichord was sufficiently loud, but the volume of each key is fixed. Bart and the prince though that it would be nice to have something that can do both, and set out to devise one, eventually resulting in the piano.
There are a lot of wealthy people in the world who fund startups, but as mentioned above, usually go with relatively safe bets and don't have the resources for the higher hanging invention/R&D fruit. I'm not sure the incremental choice is a provably safer investment or just feels safer, but it's more popular regardless for those actively betting on new ideas.
Big orgs like IBM, AT&T, Xerox, etc. used to have pie-in-the-sky labs, but it turned out they were not able to turn them into new products often enough to pay the "lab rent". They have since shifted toward the incremental choices. There are great ideas from that era, like GUI's, SmallTalk, and laser printer, but most of the financial benefits ended up at other companies because they choked at implementation.
um (Score:2)
than teaching kids to rebel against convention, think outside the box, turn convention upside down and beat their own path towards solving a thorny problem?
Every kid thinks they are rebelling against convention, while generally slavishly following a convention. The only question is whose conventions.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes. I've had to temper a desire to say "been there, done that" to new personnel. One of the important steps is to accept when their idea is _good enough_ and let them use it, rather than inserting the older and more optimized solution from long experience.
Destination Imagination (Score:2)
Yeah, there is a big push to get kids into "coding". There's even an outfit promising to get them coding React apps for money in fifth grade, when they should be building tree houses. It's ridiculous.
One great organization teaching kids creativity and inventiveness is Destination Imagination [destinatio...nation.org]. It hosts a global competition in which teams of kids compete for the best solution to both a challenge that's known in advance, and "Instant Challenges". Parents promise to help, but not to interfere in the slightest--
You cannot (Score:2)
Inventing things is something some (very few) people can to. First, you need to be an independent thinker, or otherwise you cannot invent. You can only "innovate" (i.e. hyping an already known idea all out of proportion). That already excludes 90% or so of the population, because you cannot teach independent thinking. You can only help those that can do it somewhat, but they would have gotten there by themselves as well. Now, next requirement is being able to do solid engineering. Inventions are useless whe
Re: You cannot (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree on that. What I was referring to things essentially being "techno fantasy" that claim to be SF.
creative toys (Score:2)
Creative toys would be erector sets, electronic kits, chemistry sets. Sorry, all illegal now. Lawyers. Kids might poke their eyes out or blow up stuff.
Current toys absolutely PREVENT creativity. A LEGO kit to build an airplane with complete instructions and special parts like wheels and a pilot? A Barbie doll with 3 outfits for school, beach and house party? When every option is clearly explained, what room remains for creative activity?
So how about a simple computer that cannot browse the internet or play
Re: (Score:3)
Adafruit sells these. Adafruit.com is filled with fun and instructional toys, and Christmas is coming up.
Re: (Score:2)
Adafruit sells these. Adafruit.com is filled with fun and instructional toys, and Christmas is coming up.
Adafruit is lovely, but suffers from New York fucking City prices. Ladyada should move herself and her business to Ohio or something. She's paying goddamn Manhattan rent right now.
Re: (Score:2)
I've found Ladyada's prices to be quite reasonable. Can you point to any better prices for equipment with a good guarantee?
Re: creative toys (Score:1)
Cost (Score:3)
"Patent Application Cost. A patent attorney will usually charge between $8,000 and $10,000 for a patent application, but the cost can be higher. In most cases, you should budget between $15,000 and $20,000 to complete the patenting process for your invention."
Yeah, this is EXACTLY why I've never filed a single patent. I have possible several inventions under my belt, but zero funding for any of them. Corporations have priced it out of the hands of individuals and forcing it to be big business only.
When we had nine planets... (Score:1)
First have to decide what inventing IS (Score:2)
Its not Tony Stark, aka, Iron Man designing a new type of nuclear reactor out of spare parts. That isn't how inventing works now, and not really how it worked even in the beginning of the industrial age. That isn't real
Its not deciding to add 4 blades rather than 3 to a razor. Its not a new cell phone with a slightly faster processor, slightly better camera and screen. Its not slightly tweaking an existing car engine design to get 5% more horsepower. Those are just incremental improvements.
Its not
naturals (Score:1)
You can try, but (Score:1)
Bring back MacGyver! (Score:2)
We had a class like this at my specialty school (Score:2)
I went to a speciality school where we had a class called "Creation". It went through different methods of thinking to try and come up with new solutions, and it had sections on how the education system basically forces students into specific patterns. For example, one lesson the teacher drew five shapes on a board, a triangle labelled with an A, a square labelled with a B, a crescent labelled with a C and a circle labelld with a D - and the question was "which shape is different" - with many students picki
Mind modes. (Score:2)
shortage? (Score:2)
the biggest shortage in the future labor market is not people who can code competently in Python, Java or C++, it is people who can actually discover or invent completely new and better ways of doing things
if there was a shortage, these people would have been (speculatively) paid more than code monkeys. our society is simply not set up for inventors to succeed. if we (as in humankind) want to benefit from these people succeeding, perhaps we need to think how we can make it possible for them first.
IP (Score:2)
Intellectual Property is from a persons brain. People have I.P.
Companies have L.P. or in layman's terms Legal Property.
In other words your I.P. becomes their L.P. and you loose your I.P.
Makes for bad incentive for kids to follow an inventive path.
Just become an accountant and accumulate F.P. that's Financial Property and live happily ever after.
financial and psychological support (Score:3)
I'm an inventor and an entrepreneur with a company founded in my garage. There's no magic spark, just a lot of work.Teamwork and communication skills are more important than raw intellect or creativity (just like in a big company).
Financial support (a small amount, don't go crazy) from close family both helps someone get a business going, and is a strong psychological boost that your family is backing you (follow through on that, help out).
This is a bit of a sick question though. As you can tell from the comments, those of us who have done this would not encourage our kids to pursue this lifestyle. Inventors and entrepreneurs should work in groups and preferably start off independently wealthy. If you can't manage that, try to make sure they have some wealthy friends.
You are so hard-working! (Score:2)
Here's the known solution: praise kids who figure out solutions by noting how hard they work, rather than how smart they are.
Studies show if you do the latter, they are more likely to give up when encountering a hard problem, because it is disconfirming to being smart.
basic skills (Score:3)
the reason why they want every kid to learn coding is that it will be a basic skill by the time they hit their working age.
as basic as being able to read, write and do math.
it's not about turning them all into programmers.
Less screen time, more imagination. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see an odd symbol, looks like a less-than sign with three dots. How do I type that into Google to learn that it's the share symbol?
Statements like that is why "ok boomer" is a popu
Why isn't everyone one-in-a-million? (Score:2)
You can't teach kids to be little Teslas. You can't teach them to be little Edisons, or Einsteins. People with that sort of imagination, talent and sheer brilliance are incredibly rare. You can't instill those traits, they are innate. You can cultivate creativity, but you can't create it. And the frequency with which that level of creativity appears in a population is incredibly low. Otherwise we would be awash in great
stranding (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That won't end well for the pig.
Teaching kids is easy (Score:2)
Show them where to start. Show them which direction to go. Say "On your marks, get set, go!"
And they're off...
Take it all away (Score:2)
You teach inventing by taking their phone, Xbox, and other toys away. You make it so that if they want a bike, they have to build it our of scraps they find in dumpsters.
Need is the mother of invention.
How do you teach inventing to kids? (Score:2)
I just beat them heavily every day, sometimes withholding food, until they come up with something original and patentable. Any failed patent applications get rewarded with cigarette burns.
Why do you ask? Do you do it differently?
How many inventors make money? (Score:2)
Because they get killed off (Score:2)
Inventing isn't about ideas, it's about business (Score:2)
Ideas are a dime a dozen. Just go to kickstarter and check out the thousands of ideas that went nowhere. The hard part is marketing your idea.
Tesla wasn't inventing things "for the betterment of humanity." He was trying to market his ideas and form companies to sell them! You can read this in the Wikipedia article linked in the summary.
Steve Jobs didn't invent the smartphone. He just convinced everyone that they needed one!
So what we should teach kids is how to run a business. THEN we'll all find out about
Re: (Score:2)
Sales at the lemonade stand are down. Waaaay down. Your kid neither interactively productized state of the art technologies nor completely engage alternative best practices. The stand needs better management to actualize mediocre, let alone awesome!
Re: (Score:2)