> My impression is that we are better placed to teach scientifically literate people. Does anyone here have experience teaching kids?
I teach kids who are fresh out of high school.
But younger children? No.
> I reckon the first basic probability concept that generally well-educated people usually trip over is conditional probability. But is that fixing that _our_ problem?
My feeling is that "our problem" depends a lot on what we want to do... and that what we want to do can be discovered by looking at what we actually _are_ doing.
In other words: instead of launching new projects that none of us are already doing, I tend to feel we should pay attention to what we actually _are_ doing, and do more of that, and get more people involved doing that. However, I _do_ feel that the programmers among us would like some guidance in finding cool but not-too-hard projects.
So I feel that right now the Azimuth Project is mainly focused on:
1. Developing network theory, with an eye toward environmental and energy applications.
1. Learning and explaining climate science, the challenges of getting carbon-free energy, etc. This is what Nad called a "peer-to-peer educational thing".
1. Writing programs that help people understand climate science.
Part 3 is where I sense the most frustration.