The iPad

... is one of the best things to happen to computing since the smartphone(iPhone) revolution. My number one complaint about it:

It does not do enough. As long as the iPad is still missing obvious features, we are not gonna see any _radical_ innovation in the tablet area from Apple. They might do something really cool when they finally implement a camera, but it is not going to be anything really surprising.

Until we have crossed the obvious, most requested features off the list, Apple is not pressured to outdo itself. Once the iPad can do everything the iPhone can, we'll start seeing innovation once more. For now we can just follow the iPhone and let it pave the way in the innovation space.

This is the only criticism I have of how Apple rolls.

Langauge

After reading Heart of Darkness by Polish author Joseph Conrad, a realization dawned upon me: Joseph Conrad was a genius. Not because of his stories, his dialogue or anything like that, but because of his ability to navigate effortlessly through the English language. A plethora of writers can do that, but what baffles me about Joseph Conrad is that he can do this despite not beginning to learn the language until the age of 21, and we can only assume that he did not become fluent until much later.

But fluent is not enough if you want to write as well as he does. If you want to write as well as Joseph Conrad, you need be able to think in English. But how can he do this? You learn the most during your first 21-36 months of your life, so how could he become so adept at English when he learned it so late?

Some believe that once you can write in a certain language without having to translate every word, you think in the given language. I only partially agree. It is one thing to be able to do this, but it is another thing to think every single thought you think in a certain language. This must give you a different grasp of the language, than just occasionally writing in it. When reading Joseph Conrad, it seems like he has this grasp of the language.

The explanation to me is that during this thought process I simply misunderstood what learning your first language actually does. It seems like it is not about learning the words, the sounds and the specific constructions, but rather about learning a language. The thought processes and the ways to organize your thoughts is what is important when learning your first language and they are the same among all languages. Even sign. It is not so much about remembering specific sounds and constructions as it is about expanding your cognitive capacity and actually learning to think.

This means that once Joseph Conrad learned a language, and whenever he got better at it, it was not the specific words or grammar that were important it was the simple act of learning. The gains of learning were much deeper and much more universal than remembering some specific sayings or metaphors.

So when Joseph Conrad began dabbling in English, his writing skills were easily translated into this new language, which is why he could become so excellent so quickly.

ADDENDUM: My final thought: Is there a cognitive difference in which language you learn first? Some languages could in theory be more articulate, more efficient and simply more concise. Would this give you better tools to think than other languages would? For example, English has one of the biggest libraries of words of any language. Does this make it better than other languages? Would it be more beneficial to teach my newborn son English, Danish or Esperanto at birth?

My immediate answer would actually be "Yes", but the difference is probably minuscule.