It is important for guys like Ben to know about machine code -- that it's down there, like DNA in your cell -- but a bright kid doesn't need to actually do it, in order to be computer-literate. (Ben wants to, though. Anyone know a good kit?)

Back in the late-seventies, I learned machine code with a Heathkit course which includes a cool 6810-based microprocessor trainer which does exactly what you describe (the 6810 is a variant of the 6800, which I think is what your Commodore 64 uses). Going to www.heathkit.com, it turns out they still have that course, EB-6810 8-Bit Microprocessor Programming, and trainer. I completely agree with your general assertion that getting close to the bits is essential for later success. Besides, it's fun!

Our research on AgentSheets is addressing the issues the article raises. In the last couple of years we have specifically explored why fewer and fewer kids (especially girls) get interested in programming course at the middle school and high school (e.g., AP courses). The main issue is that the process of programming is not perceived to be a fun and creative process. Furthermore, especially high school AP programming use pedagogical approaches (e.g. first learn basics and then some semesters after that start working on "interesting" projects) that simply do not attract students. This approach has not worked for learning natural languages and it does not appear to work for programming languages either. We use AgentSheets to teach students (US, Europe and Asia) to design and build video games. We have a gradual design-based approach in which students learn to make increasingly complex games (Frogger, Pacman, .... The Sims) and in the process of doing so acquire not just programming but more general design skills. Tools that teach creative thinking and technological mastery do exist. You should see the kids - the same ones who play Halo 2 at home and are diagnosed with ADD - make just the most amazing games, learn about math and design in the context of building their own games.

About AgentSheets: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgentSheets

The problem can only be solved by Microsoft? Hey, convenient! As a parent all I have to do is write them grumpy letter and go back to sleep.

If Microsoft doesn't choose to solve it, we are doomed, doomed, doomed because downloading is just completely unacceptable! Never mind that more than 12% of the population has already successfully taken on the unthinkably challenging task of downloading and installing Firefox instead of suffering with Internet Explorer. And they did that just to get something incrementally better. Not something they couldn't have at all otherwise, something their children need for school.

Never mind that we're talking about kids - kids who are more than savvy enough to figure out how to download games!

Must our response be limited to sternly-worded letters to Redmond? Must we discourage programmers who might otherwise be inclined to think about this problem and create an easy-as-Firefox download from bothering?

Appealing to Bill Gates isn't the only way out of this one. A free BASIC interpreter that can do a little bit of graphics could be easily assembled from the existing free "Bywater BASIC" program and a little additional user-friendly glitz to help Windows users feel comfortable (yes, I understand that the installation must be made far more accessible). Schools could simply hand that out on CD, at no cost beyond duplication of the CD. Problem solved - this year, this month if folks are motivated, not in Vista 2.

A last note: you mention the ability to put simple graphics on the screen. Those BASIC interpreters you remember were never a lingua franca, most programs didn't move from one brand to another well, and graphics were especially terrible that way. That Commodore 64 you mentioned doesn't even have "draw a dot here" BASIC commands, unless you use an optional, third-party cartridge.

Of course, a lot of parents bought that cartridge. Even though it didn't come from the manufacturer.

I do appreciate the underlying ideas in this article - thanks for kicking up the right storm at the right time.

Try this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C64#Emulators

next time for a free C64 experience. Any kid can code basic for free on it anytime anywhere.

I used to program in MS-DOS basic when I was a kid. I googled for "FreeDOS basic" and there seem to free solutions available now.

Even if you want Commodore 64 or Sinclair, their are emulators available for free download. You can have all the retroness you need to run old math book examples.

I've read some of Brin's books, but like this article, its something that sounds interesting that goes nowhere.

P.S. get your kid to program in Java, and skip the BASIC.

Perhaps the author could look for an emulator, I know there are dozens of C64 emulators out there for mac windows and linux (mostly for people who want to play the old C64 games) but this may also server the pourpose of giving Ben and freinds the ability to program.

Also look at what the open source comunity has to offer, not sure if a basic version suitable exists but worth looking if you havent aready.

Good luck and I hope my comments were helpful.

Dave.

Maybe the reason programming isn't cool among kids these days is precisely because it is taught in school these days. And Brin is right when he says in his recent letter that it was only a few elite thousands, back in the day, who taught themselves how to program in BASIC when they were in grade school or high school. That was what made them cool, that they could do something that wasn't taught, and that most people couldn't do. They got together on their own. They called their get-togethers "Geek Fests" and they made the word "geek" as applied to themselves something to be proud of. They were indeed an elite.

And I agree with Brin that our schools need to teach, not so much the elite thousands, as the ordinary millions better, much better. Not only in computer-related skills but natural languages and literature and social sciences and physics and biology and *real* mathematics (including logic) and real trade skills, and real physical education: the whole lot. What Salon-reader could not agree with that? The problem is not the absence of needed programming tools, nor the plethora of easy things to do on a computer. The problem is that most schools don't get enough resources, enough teachers, enough of anything really. And I think most of us know the reasons for that.