Jewelbots – A Friendship Bracelet You Can Code(jewelbots.com)
jewelbots.com
Jewelbots – A Friendship Bracelet You Can Code
https://jewelbots.com/
172 comments
There's nothing worng with liking girly stuff and being into STEM.
I'm a pretty "masculine" (for a lack of better expression) guy who likes a fair amount of girly stuff. My best friend is a girly girl who's in STEM and she's brilliant at her job.
If your girls want to be girly, there's nothing wrong with it! I don't understand the recent "trend" of people being against girly girls or or boyish boys. People will choose to be what best suits them. And if your girls decide they don't want to be girly at one point in their life, also great.
I'm a pretty "masculine" (for a lack of better expression) guy who likes a fair amount of girly stuff. My best friend is a girly girl who's in STEM and she's brilliant at her job.
If your girls want to be girly, there's nothing wrong with it! I don't understand the recent "trend" of people being against girly girls or or boyish boys. People will choose to be what best suits them. And if your girls decide they don't want to be girly at one point in their life, also great.
Good point - I suppose I really meant they are channelled in certain "girly" directions when you could argue that there are other valid (and also "girly") directions also. And yes, I will support whatever way they choose to express themselves. Gender issues are tough!
I have 2 daughters and one is just all about her phone (She is older and living on her own) my 11 year old would love this but it was because of code.org and their minecraft section.
I tried Arduino and Scratch but that it was scratch with minecraft made all the difference. Each kid has their own selves and likes. Sometimes they are similar and others they are opposites and we as parents flounder and stay up late wondering if we are doing the right things for our kids all the time. I like this product but I couldn't shell out $100 on Friendship bracelets.
I tried Arduino and Scratch but that it was scratch with minecraft made all the difference. Each kid has their own selves and likes. Sometimes they are similar and others they are opposites and we as parents flounder and stay up late wondering if we are doing the right things for our kids all the time. I like this product but I couldn't shell out $100 on Friendship bracelets.
I am TOTES buying one of these for myself (cis male).
I wouldn't deprive anyone of this.
I wouldn't deprive anyone of this.
But do you really like it? Or would you just buy it out of virtue signaling bullshit reasons?
What's gendered about Jewelbots?
Even without socialization, I'd bet some girls will still like girly stuff.
The problem isn’t that girls like “girly” stuff.
The problem is that stuff is defined as “girly”.
That's because boys usually don't like it...?
Or do you mean that "girly" is seen as something negative?
males can like girly stuff too
Why do men and women need to be the same? Isn't it ok to be different?
It's absolutely okay to be different. In fact, everybody is different, and that's one of the big problems with trying to slot people into one of two buckets.
We aren't that different.
If we weren’t “that” different, gender reassignment would not be a thing.
If gender reassignment was performed on 40% of the population I would agree with you.
That makes no sense.
There is a segment of the population that is physically one gender but feels they are actually the other. If we weren't that different, nobody would go through the massive physical alteration.
The size of the population that has gender dysphoria is irrelevant.
There is a segment of the population that is physically one gender but feels they are actually the other. If we weren't that different, nobody would go through the massive physical alteration.
The size of the population that has gender dysphoria is irrelevant.
Gender reassignment is an statistical anomaly, less than 0.1% of the population.
Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. The site rules specifically ask us all to avoid them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
The reason for this is that they're (a) always the same and (b) always degnerate. (a) makes threads unsubstantive and (b) makes them uncivil. Civil, substantive conversation is the whole idea of HN threads—however rarely we may actually achieve it—so you could hardly do anything that more violates the site's values, even if you didn't mean to. Not meaning to makes it more insidious in a way.
The reason for this is that they're (a) always the same and (b) always degnerate. (a) makes threads unsubstantive and (b) makes them uncivil. Civil, substantive conversation is the whole idea of HN threads—however rarely we may actually achieve it—so you could hardly do anything that more violates the site's values, even if you didn't mean to. Not meaning to makes it more insidious in a way.
Holy moly that website does a bad job of describing what they actually do. Apparently you can program the lights and vibrations? I looked up a YouTube video, apparently they can be programmed for notifications from your phone?
Marketing team really dropped the ball on this one.
Marketing team really dropped the ball on this one.
I disagree.
"When Nyla got Jewelbots for her birthday she gave the second one to Wenhao, a girl in her class."
"Nyla and Wenhao's Jewelbots light up blue when they are together (Blue is Wenhao's favorite color)"
"They make a secret language just for their Jewelbots. Sending one buzz means "look behind you!"."
"Using the power of STEM, Nyla and her friends make games and custom friend animations by writing code and uploading it to their Jewelbots!"
That pretty unambigiously describes a piece of programmable jewellery to me. It's doing it in a more story-driven way than presenting a bulleted list of specs, but given the target audience that makes sense. Having read that page I'm really not even slightly confused about what it is.
"When Nyla got Jewelbots for her birthday she gave the second one to Wenhao, a girl in her class."
"Nyla and Wenhao's Jewelbots light up blue when they are together (Blue is Wenhao's favorite color)"
"They make a secret language just for their Jewelbots. Sending one buzz means "look behind you!"."
"Using the power of STEM, Nyla and her friends make games and custom friend animations by writing code and uploading it to their Jewelbots!"
That pretty unambigiously describes a piece of programmable jewellery to me. It's doing it in a more story-driven way than presenting a bulleted list of specs, but given the target audience that makes sense. Having read that page I'm really not even slightly confused about what it is.
"Step 2 To begin coding your Jewelbot, you will need to download the Arduino IDE."
"Step 1: In a terminal, input the command vimtutor..."
Yeah good luck with that. Most people struggle (not just little girls) already struggle to install software where you literally have to click "continue" 3 times...
[deleted]
I thought it was pretty well done considering the target audience.
Brief tagline "Friendship bracelet. That you can code" to pique your interest.
Then a user story showing how someone actually used it.
I'm sure it can be improved significantly, but I feel the idea behind pitching why you would want to buy it (it's a friendship bracelet that does cool things like light up the same color when you're together) as opposed to its capabilities is not necessarily that far off the mark for a product of this nature (e.g. the Apple Watch landing page as of right now doesn't describe anything about what the Watch can do...it's just selling the fact that it's a watch).
Brief tagline "Friendship bracelet. That you can code" to pique your interest.
Then a user story showing how someone actually used it.
I'm sure it can be improved significantly, but I feel the idea behind pitching why you would want to buy it (it's a friendship bracelet that does cool things like light up the same color when you're together) as opposed to its capabilities is not necessarily that far off the mark for a product of this nature (e.g. the Apple Watch landing page as of right now doesn't describe anything about what the Watch can do...it's just selling the fact that it's a watch).
Thanks so much for your feedback! Sounds like we have some things to add to the FAQ!
Jewelbots can be programmed just like an Arduino using C++. Real code! Because we believe that kids are super smart (Also, I starting writing C++ at 11).
Jewelbots can be programmed just like an Arduino using C++. Real code! Because we believe that kids are super smart (Also, I starting writing C++ at 11).
And I started at 12, so I feel you are a kindred spirit and want you to win so much.
But is C++ really the first/best/only programming experience? Why would what be the right choice? UX absolutely just as important for developers as is is for ordinary users.
I imagine the user experience unfolding for my 11 year old daughter, ideally there is as little friction as possible from brcelet in hand to making code run. We want to minimize frustrations in order to maximize time spent doing and creating.
I’m not afraid 11 year olds will lack the ability to use C++, I’m afraid of it not being the way that’s most fun and engaging. And I certainly don’t mean dumbed down. Engineers at any age get more enjoyment from having the best tool for the job.
But is C++ really the first/best/only programming experience? Why would what be the right choice? UX absolutely just as important for developers as is is for ordinary users.
I imagine the user experience unfolding for my 11 year old daughter, ideally there is as little friction as possible from brcelet in hand to making code run. We want to minimize frustrations in order to maximize time spent doing and creating.
I’m not afraid 11 year olds will lack the ability to use C++, I’m afraid of it not being the way that’s most fun and engaging. And I certainly don’t mean dumbed down. Engineers at any age get more enjoyment from having the best tool for the job.
The language choice I imagine was driven by their choice of Arduino.
Arduino got where they are in part by having a rather nice IDE for a microcontroller, a nice simplified version of C++ (the Arduino language, which I assume can be used here) that eliminates a lot of the complexity and made it very simple to get started, and a nice easy pattern to upload / compile / test.
Personally, I'm not aware of a better choice out there in the microcontroller world. And it looks like the setup makes it easy (2 lines of code) to turn on / off LEDs or buzzers.
What's nice about using Arduino as well, is that the ecosystem of Arduino is very large. So it's not that much of a step up from here to other hardware projects. It's also not a huge leap from Arduino C to the many other C and C-like languages out there as well.
Arduino got where they are in part by having a rather nice IDE for a microcontroller, a nice simplified version of C++ (the Arduino language, which I assume can be used here) that eliminates a lot of the complexity and made it very simple to get started, and a nice easy pattern to upload / compile / test.
Personally, I'm not aware of a better choice out there in the microcontroller world. And it looks like the setup makes it easy (2 lines of code) to turn on / off LEDs or buzzers.
What's nice about using Arduino as well, is that the ecosystem of Arduino is very large. So it's not that much of a step up from here to other hardware projects. It's also not a huge leap from Arduino C to the many other C and C-like languages out there as well.
That’s great to know thank you. Having a great tooling/environment/ecosystem is probably more important than the language choice itself.
While I tend to agree with you—I started with C++ around that time as well—I do wish they included some type of safer language to play with as some c++ errors/warnings took me days to work around and may have put me off entirely had I a strong social life at the time :) I seem to remember logo working well for mindstorms when I was also that age. Why not support something a tiny bit friendlier than possibly the most complex language in active professional use?
No problem, happy to help. I think adding a FAQ at the top that's like, "What can a Jewelbot be programmed to do?" with a longer list of possible use cases would help. The front page kind of lists them but I found it to be a bit unclear, and that's from a technical perspective. A non techie parent might be even more confused, so I find it's helpful to ELI5.
My knee jerk reaction was pretty negative, but on only a few seconds’ reflection I think this is great. Absolutely no reason why kids can’t start with C++; it doesn’t have to be template meta programming insanity from the get-go. Motivated kids have infinite capacity for learning and a lot of time for exploration.
Kudos for not patronizing them with some awful imitation of flow programming or some neutered scripting language.
Kudos for not patronizing them with some awful imitation of flow programming or some neutered scripting language.
Yeah, right? I don't think the drag -> drop coding does a lot of help when it comes to learning.
Talking to my male peers, I learned that most of them started coding when they were Tweens, largely because they wanted to make games or found an open source project they loved. Jewelbots are designed to be the same for girls. So far so good!
Talking to my male peers, I learned that most of them started coding when they were Tweens, largely because they wanted to make games or found an open source project they loved. Jewelbots are designed to be the same for girls. So far so good!
Yup. There's a lot of stuff that tries to teach that 'programmer mindset'; flow programming is one end of it. My eldest daughter is 5 and is at the other end: the 'Robot Turtles' board game. She likes it. I really don't know that it will make the slightest difference in her future programming ability, which will range anywhere from epsilon to a lot (and will have nothing to do with me beyond me providing food, a roof, and moral support.)
Were she older, I would absolutely be making sure these got on her radar so I could gauge her interest. Nothing so crass as _showing her_ of course.
I love the risk you're taking here: not only a hardware startup, but also one where success is predicated on passing the cool filter of tween girls. There is something delightfully subversive in marketing C++ programmable jewelry to young girls; it's like a 'fuck you' to Lego Friends. I really want this to succeed. Good luck.
Were she older, I would absolutely be making sure these got on her radar so I could gauge her interest. Nothing so crass as _showing her_ of course.
I love the risk you're taking here: not only a hardware startup, but also one where success is predicated on passing the cool filter of tween girls. There is something delightfully subversive in marketing C++ programmable jewelry to young girls; it's like a 'fuck you' to Lego Friends. I really want this to succeed. Good luck.
[deleted]
I think the real C++ part is so important because it respects the abilities and intelligence of children to participate in the adult world using a real (yet approachable) technology that is also used in industry. This also makes these skills earned poking around with a fun toy transferable to solving their own problems, doing coursework at university, and later on entering the technology labor market. Other programming toys aimed at kids like NXT graphical programming or scratch don't have the same transferability and I've noticed that kids see right through that.
I don't think that you need to worry about the transferability of skills from a 11-year-olds toy to professional software development. The far more important thing to transfer is interest/excitement, and that may (or may not -- you're the expert) be easiest to do with a language other than C++. Part of what makes Arduino so fun is how fast you can get to a blinky LED, and part of what makes Scratch so fun is how quickly you can get to interactive graphics. I feel like there has to be something (not necessarily existing today) which is powerful enough to make kids feel like they are in control of the device without annoying arcana like semicolon errors.
These things build on each other over time and learning a language is not exactly easy, especially if you are starting out. An important aspect of the transferability here is that you can go from programming a jewelbot in c++ to programming other microcontrollers. You don't have to learn a completely different language and toolchain to continue exploring programming on a different platform.
Some kids can see through anything, but I think it’s hugely naive to think many kids won’t struggle with it. Do you remember how hard kids find algebra? That syntax is downright trivial compared to explaining why you need to insert a space between angle brackets when composing templates, or why calling your method overloaded for pointers might sometimes call an integer one instead when passed a null literal, or how to debug e.g. memory alignment errors, which are often presented with cryptic segmentation faults.
I think it’s great for a certain crowd, but this could be quite frustrating for many pre teens and ultimately put them off of casual coding.
Besides, kids aren’t exactly leaping at micro controllers. And why should they? Software programming is applicable to more and more prospective jobs every year.
I think it’s great for a certain crowd, but this could be quite frustrating for many pre teens and ultimately put them off of casual coding.
Besides, kids aren’t exactly leaping at micro controllers. And why should they? Software programming is applicable to more and more prospective jobs every year.
> Some kids can see through anything, but I think it’s hugely naive to think many kids won’t struggle with it. Do you remember how hard kids find algebra? That syntax is downright trivial compared to explaining why you need to insert a space between angle brackets when composing templates, or why calling your method overloaded for pointers might sometimes call an integer one instead when passed a null literal, or how to debug e.g. memory alignment errors, which are often presented with cryptic segmentation faults.
> I think it’s great for a certain crowd, but this could be quite frustrating for many pre teens and ultimately put them off of casual coding.
> Besides, kids aren’t exactly leaping at micro controllers. And why should they? Software programming is applicable to more and more prospective jobs every year.
>why you need to insert a space between angle brackets when composing templates,
You don't have to anymore ;)
> I think it’s great for a certain crowd, but this could be quite frustrating for many pre teens and ultimately put them off of casual coding.
> Besides, kids aren’t exactly leaping at micro controllers. And why should they? Software programming is applicable to more and more prospective jobs every year.
>why you need to insert a space between angle brackets when composing templates,
You don't have to anymore ;)
What they will do is make the nearly inevitable drama of teen girl lives more expensive as the devices are discarded as rapidly as BFFs and boyfriends.
The drama in a young teen's life seems to know no limits. It's all very important to them, at least for the moment. As a parent, you're sort of obligated to take it Very Seriously.
These are just one more thing to be taken Very Seriously.
I do find it amusing that marketing has decided to latch onto STEM for young ladies. It's a noble goal, but I'm not sure trinkets are the way to go about it.
Sort of related: I'm a bit proud that my daughter is an MD, but my only help, aside from paying for it, was just offering to support her, regardless of her career choices - and trying to keep a good sense of humor.
The drama in a young teen's life seems to know no limits. It's all very important to them, at least for the moment. As a parent, you're sort of obligated to take it Very Seriously.
These are just one more thing to be taken Very Seriously.
I do find it amusing that marketing has decided to latch onto STEM for young ladies. It's a noble goal, but I'm not sure trinkets are the way to go about it.
Sort of related: I'm a bit proud that my daughter is an MD, but my only help, aside from paying for it, was just offering to support her, regardless of her career choices - and trying to keep a good sense of humor.
Hi! I hope we don't get discarded! We're a new product, so we don't yet have too much data about retention. We do know that 44% of our users code their Jewelbots using C++, many as first time coders! We also are about to ship our 10,000th unit. That makes over 4,000 new coders in the world (many younger than 10 years old)!
I'd hope so too, but such seemed the way of my daughter and her friends when they were in that age bracket. Friendships were tossed aside at the slightest of reasons. It was a lot of drama.
While probably sexist to note this, my son and his friends didn't seem to have nearly the same drama. I'm not sure what the difference is but it certainly was both real and notable. I'm also sure it isn't universal.
While probably sexist to note this, my son and his friends didn't seem to have nearly the same drama. I'm not sure what the difference is but it certainly was both real and notable. I'm also sure it isn't universal.
Maybe a fallback, not that you need one yet, when/if discarding is an issue, make a ring that has less functionality but isn't as obtrusive. The cool kids keep their Jewelbots in their bag but a ring lets them know of some activity.
"the nearly inevitable drama of teen girl lives more expensive as the devices are discarded as rapidly as BFFs and boyfriends."
This is an untrue stereotype. I would argue that this stereotype, teen girls are unnecessarily and overly dramatic, is one of the same stereotypes that dissuades girls from coding in the first place.
This is an untrue stereotype. I would argue that this stereotype, teen girls are unnecessarily and overly dramatic, is one of the same stereotypes that dissuades girls from coding in the first place.
I'm not sure what you mean. Girls and guys in their young teen years (and older teen years) are both likely to fall in/out with other people. Both are very dramatic. While it could be confirmation bias, girls are more likely to "ignore each other", and other things that more permanently changes relationships.
If this is two bands that are interconnected that could get expensive.
If this is two bands that are interconnected that could get expensive.
You can argue that but, out of curiosity, I just sent my daughter a text.
Me: 'How long do you think you kept friendship bracelets for?'
Her reply: 'Maybe two weeks. I still have one from [redacted] somewhere.'
As I said, it surely isn't universal but she and her friends all fit that pattern. It didn't keep her from STEM, she's an MD.
Me: 'How long do you think you kept friendship bracelets for?'
Her reply: 'Maybe two weeks. I still have one from [redacted] somewhere.'
As I said, it surely isn't universal but she and her friends all fit that pattern. It didn't keep her from STEM, she's an MD.
> It didn't keep her from STEM, she's an MD.
That's not out of the norm; roughly half of medical students are women: https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/
The "shortage of women in STEM" mostly refers to engineering and computer science.
That's not out of the norm; roughly half of medical students are women: https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/
The "shortage of women in STEM" mostly refers to engineering and computer science.
On a related note, can anyone suggest sites with great educational/fun gifts like this for girls?
Raspberry Pi is always my go to for 8+ year olds.
Looking forward to seeing other recommendations (perhaps more specific, and best with personal anecdata).
· Ask HN: Know of any non-digital toys/games that teach, for 6-10 year olds? | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14942570 (Aug 2017, 71 comments)
· Elementary School Coding & Robotics Resources | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r1b2CM1uTdST47IbWa7zlZYm... found on: Project Bloks: Making code physical for kids | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11986593 (Jun 2016)
· http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ReviewLittleBitsGadgetsAndGizm... (Jan 2016) <- links to 3 previous posts with additional recommendations
· Teaching a 3-Year-Old to Program Without a Computer Screen (Cubetto - https://www.primotoys.com/) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10586661 (Nov 2015, 35 comments)
· DragonBox: Secretly teach algebra to your children | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9469364 (May 2015, 100 comments)
· Osmo (iPad app with add-on hardware) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7784243 (May 2014, 104 comments)
· Turn anything into a videogame controller, even a banana (https://makeymakey.com/) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3971869 (May 2012, 25 comments)
Robot Turtles (http://www.robotturtles.com/) makes a good jumping-off point for further research as it is a favorite in this category: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=robot%20turtles&sort=byDate&ty...
--
PS. volunteer application re-opens Feb 2018: https://www.tealsk12.org/
pair volunteer CS professionals across the US with classroom teachers
· Ask HN: Know of any non-digital toys/games that teach, for 6-10 year olds? | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14942570 (Aug 2017, 71 comments)
· Elementary School Coding & Robotics Resources | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r1b2CM1uTdST47IbWa7zlZYm... found on: Project Bloks: Making code physical for kids | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11986593 (Jun 2016)
· http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ReviewLittleBitsGadgetsAndGizm... (Jan 2016) <- links to 3 previous posts with additional recommendations
· Teaching a 3-Year-Old to Program Without a Computer Screen (Cubetto - https://www.primotoys.com/) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10586661 (Nov 2015, 35 comments)
· DragonBox: Secretly teach algebra to your children | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9469364 (May 2015, 100 comments)
· Osmo (iPad app with add-on hardware) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7784243 (May 2014, 104 comments)
· Turn anything into a videogame controller, even a banana (https://makeymakey.com/) | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3971869 (May 2012, 25 comments)
Robot Turtles (http://www.robotturtles.com/) makes a good jumping-off point for further research as it is a favorite in this category: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=robot%20turtles&sort=byDate&ty...
--
PS. volunteer application re-opens Feb 2018: https://www.tealsk12.org/
pair volunteer CS professionals across the US with classroom teachers
I'd recommend the Adabox from Adafruit, it's a subscription service ... https://www.adafruit.com/adabox
There was a great episode on on Jewelbots on the Embedded.fm podcast which is worth a listen. In fact the podcast is worth a listen in general
http://embedded.fm/episodes/173
http://embedded.fm/episodes/173
This would be a lot better if it was priced closer to cost. $70 is excessive for an a few RGB LEDs, microcontroller and a buzz motor. These things can't cost more than $10 to manufacture even at low scale. You have to buy at least 2 for it to be interesting they should sell them for $20-$40 each. Maybe the pricing will come down as they get orders.
Very cool concept though.
I hope they have some patents on it or they will be seriously undercut.
Very cool concept though.
I hope they have some patents on it or they will be seriously undercut.
You may not be aware but comments like this (e.g. "too expensive", "a few LEDs & a microcontroller") are pretty much a trope for hardware entrepreneurs these days.
I think it's important for this to be pointed out because I feel such comments are (1) ill-informed; (2) disrespectful; and, (3) encourage poor thinking around pricing strategies.
(1) Depending on the model, on its own the Nordic MCU is, say, ~$US2.60 @ Qty 1,000. Add a vibration motor for ~$US2 @ Qty 1,000 (Yeah, mechanical parts can be expensive relative to electronic parts). Add, say, 3 WS2812B RGB LEDs for $1.00. A total of $5.60--no battery, no PCB, no support components, no Bluetooth antenna, no charging circuitry, no enclosure, no packaging. And these things are going on a kid's arm--you don't want to be skimping on quality.
And, that's just the Bill of Material.
No assembly costs, no production test jigs, no wastage, no certification/safety costs, no shipping costs, no warehousing costs. (To say nothing of software development costs, marketing, supply chain management etc etc.)
If we're going from a cost-based pricing model then back-of-envelope calculations generally suggest 2 x BOM for wholesale price and 2 x wholesale price for retail price (i.e. 4 x BOM). And, even if we don't plan for retail sales now, if we don't factor it in, we can't just double our price later.
So, even at the extremely unlikely BOM cost of $10, the minimum a startup should be considering selling at would be $40. Oh, actual BOM cost is closer to $15? That's an immediate jump to $60 RRP.
And that's only scratching the surface of the costs involved, I recommend the following if you want more details:
* https://blog.bolt.io/will-your-hardware-startup-make-money-6... * https://learn.adafruit.com/how-to-build-a-hardware-startup?v... * https://blog.bolt.io/hardware-by-the-numbers-part-2-financin... * http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-creating-hardware...
(Also, by way of comparison, the original Pebble launched for between $99-$150 how much difference in complexity/cost do you imagine between the two? I would say primarily the screen--and the Pebble was their second watch product. Another useful comparison: the standard Arduino Uno.)
(2) This product isn't just "a few RGB LEDs, microcontroller and a buzz motor"--not only is that not the entire BOM, what the device itself is (ignoring software and educational support material) is a robust, durable, small wearable device targeting children with an appealing enclosure, Bluetooth connectivity and the ability to upload programs. And dismissing the engineering effort required to produce any product, let alone an electronic wearable for children is, I believe, disrespectful of those developing it.
(3) For a new product, in most cases, trying to minimize retail price to make it appealing is a poor strategy for stimulating demand--it creates unrealistic expectations, sends poor quality/value signals, assumes all costs are known quantities and potentially threatens the very existence of the company.
For a not insignificant portion of the early target market with disposable income to spend on a new "educational toy" the difference between $40 and $70 is barely noticeable--so why would a startup make their life significantly more difficult by cutting their own throats on price. A company that doesn't sell their product at a sustainable price isn't doing their customers any favors.
If they start out with a bare minimum price a company also can't discount--an act which can stimulate demand at the correct stage of the product life/sales cycle.
Now, if the objection is that a product is unaffordable, that's an entirely different topic. And, yes, any low volume, educational toy product will be unaffordable to a large segment of the population but that's not a reason for a company to price their product non-sustainably.
Instead, a company that cares about such things can work to reduce/optimize production costs on subsequent models, offer discounts in special cases or create programmes to enable people unable to afford their products to purchase or be gifted them.
And, in this particular case, it's not like we're talking pouches of citrus pulp here...
Anyway, have a free rant--it's excellent value for money.
Making anything is hard enough and pricing an educational toy is a fraught enough exercise for people who actually care without having to also deal with uninformed, unrealistic & unreasonable criticism of it.
Also, patents cost time & money to obtain and to defend--they're not a panacea.
Thanks for reading. Have a nice day. Maybe make an LED blink, I recommend it. :)
I think it's important for this to be pointed out because I feel such comments are (1) ill-informed; (2) disrespectful; and, (3) encourage poor thinking around pricing strategies.
(1) Depending on the model, on its own the Nordic MCU is, say, ~$US2.60 @ Qty 1,000. Add a vibration motor for ~$US2 @ Qty 1,000 (Yeah, mechanical parts can be expensive relative to electronic parts). Add, say, 3 WS2812B RGB LEDs for $1.00. A total of $5.60--no battery, no PCB, no support components, no Bluetooth antenna, no charging circuitry, no enclosure, no packaging. And these things are going on a kid's arm--you don't want to be skimping on quality.
And, that's just the Bill of Material.
No assembly costs, no production test jigs, no wastage, no certification/safety costs, no shipping costs, no warehousing costs. (To say nothing of software development costs, marketing, supply chain management etc etc.)
If we're going from a cost-based pricing model then back-of-envelope calculations generally suggest 2 x BOM for wholesale price and 2 x wholesale price for retail price (i.e. 4 x BOM). And, even if we don't plan for retail sales now, if we don't factor it in, we can't just double our price later.
So, even at the extremely unlikely BOM cost of $10, the minimum a startup should be considering selling at would be $40. Oh, actual BOM cost is closer to $15? That's an immediate jump to $60 RRP.
And that's only scratching the surface of the costs involved, I recommend the following if you want more details:
* https://blog.bolt.io/will-your-hardware-startup-make-money-6... * https://learn.adafruit.com/how-to-build-a-hardware-startup?v... * https://blog.bolt.io/hardware-by-the-numbers-part-2-financin... * http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-creating-hardware...
(Also, by way of comparison, the original Pebble launched for between $99-$150 how much difference in complexity/cost do you imagine between the two? I would say primarily the screen--and the Pebble was their second watch product. Another useful comparison: the standard Arduino Uno.)
(2) This product isn't just "a few RGB LEDs, microcontroller and a buzz motor"--not only is that not the entire BOM, what the device itself is (ignoring software and educational support material) is a robust, durable, small wearable device targeting children with an appealing enclosure, Bluetooth connectivity and the ability to upload programs. And dismissing the engineering effort required to produce any product, let alone an electronic wearable for children is, I believe, disrespectful of those developing it.
(3) For a new product, in most cases, trying to minimize retail price to make it appealing is a poor strategy for stimulating demand--it creates unrealistic expectations, sends poor quality/value signals, assumes all costs are known quantities and potentially threatens the very existence of the company.
For a not insignificant portion of the early target market with disposable income to spend on a new "educational toy" the difference between $40 and $70 is barely noticeable--so why would a startup make their life significantly more difficult by cutting their own throats on price. A company that doesn't sell their product at a sustainable price isn't doing their customers any favors.
If they start out with a bare minimum price a company also can't discount--an act which can stimulate demand at the correct stage of the product life/sales cycle.
Now, if the objection is that a product is unaffordable, that's an entirely different topic. And, yes, any low volume, educational toy product will be unaffordable to a large segment of the population but that's not a reason for a company to price their product non-sustainably.
Instead, a company that cares about such things can work to reduce/optimize production costs on subsequent models, offer discounts in special cases or create programmes to enable people unable to afford their products to purchase or be gifted them.
And, in this particular case, it's not like we're talking pouches of citrus pulp here...
Anyway, have a free rant--it's excellent value for money.
Making anything is hard enough and pricing an educational toy is a fraught enough exercise for people who actually care without having to also deal with uninformed, unrealistic & unreasonable criticism of it.
Also, patents cost time & money to obtain and to defend--they're not a panacea.
Thanks for reading. Have a nice day. Maybe make an LED blink, I recommend it. :)
You are leaving out a few things, like battery, charging, bluetooth, etc.
Agree that lower pricing would help though. Perhaps hoping that early adopters can pay off things like the plastic molds, phone apps, and design.
Agree that lower pricing would help though. Perhaps hoping that early adopters can pay off things like the plastic molds, phone apps, and design.
Maybe it changed since you posted this, but 129$ for a three pack sounds like a decent price, and pretty close to what you're saying.
That being said, however, I think they should figure out a way to get the multi packs able to be purchased by multiple groups of parents. This looks like great fun for a group, and sad on its own, but parents probably don't want to buy expensive-ish toys for their kids friends.
Then again, the easy thing to do here would probably be to have each one come with a few one time use coupon codes to give to their friends parents. "Recruit a friend into your squad and get 30$ off" etc.
That being said, however, I think they should figure out a way to get the multi packs able to be purchased by multiple groups of parents. This looks like great fun for a group, and sad on its own, but parents probably don't want to buy expensive-ish toys for their kids friends.
Then again, the easy thing to do here would probably be to have each one come with a few one time use coupon codes to give to their friends parents. "Recruit a friend into your squad and get 30$ off" etc.
Yes! I love this idea and we are working on something similar currently.
We do have patents, thank goodness! Our manufacturing costs are no where near $10, that would be amazing. We have a more advanced chipset than a Fitbit and all the capabilities of an Apple Watch (without the screen). Jewelbots can have 8 simultaneous central and peripheral relationships via bluetooth. We are the only wearable device that talks to other wearable devices! (we are also completely open source!)
>all the capabilities of an Apple Watch
The site makes it appear as if your device is running a microcontroller, AVR or similar. The Apple watch is a full on ARM processor running an operating system.
But perhaps you meant something else by the statement? I'd be curious to know what all is inside.
Edit: Poking around your github repos, it appears the device has a Nordic nRF51822, basically an SoC with an Arm Cortex M0 microcontroller plus a Bluetooth module.
The site makes it appear as if your device is running a microcontroller, AVR or similar. The Apple watch is a full on ARM processor running an operating system.
But perhaps you meant something else by the statement? I'd be curious to know what all is inside.
Edit: Poking around your github repos, it appears the device has a Nordic nRF51822, basically an SoC with an Arm Cortex M0 microcontroller plus a Bluetooth module.
Agree, super cool.
I get hung up on strange addition in pricing.
1 for 69
2 for 99 = 69 + 30
3 for 129 = 69 + 30 * 2
10 for 430 = 129 * 3 + 30 + 13
69 + 30 * 9 = 339 != 430
I get hung up on strange addition in pricing.
1 for 69
2 for 99 = 69 + 30
3 for 129 = 69 + 30 * 2
10 for 430 = 129 * 3 + 30 + 13
69 + 30 * 9 = 339 != 430
Funny how the conversation seems to hover around gender. Who cares? I have children of both genders (2 boys, 1 girl) and they really like the same things. The girl is a little more outdoorsy and the boys like screens more, it seems, but I don't esp. attribute that to gender, more to their personal inclination. All three love roller skating, and cooking, and yelling, and also, making houses with blankets and pillows.
Anyway, one point the FAQ doesn't seem to cover is how is this thing powered and how long does a charge last? Can it beep and hum and do the things it does, for at least a full day?
Anyway, one point the FAQ doesn't seem to cover is how is this thing powered and how long does a charge last? Can it beep and hum and do the things it does, for at least a full day?
Thanks for your feedback! Adding today.
CppCast episode:
http://cppcast.com/2017/04/sara-chipps/
http://cppcast.com/2017/04/sara-chipps/
This sound like the idea laid out in the book PopCo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PopCo). It is a good read.
You have got to get that price down. $69. You can get a 3G android smartwatch phone for $65 [1].
[1] https://www.gearbest.com/smart-watch-phone/pp_507114.html
[1] https://www.gearbest.com/smart-watch-phone/pp_507114.html
friendship bracelets are made, and the raw materials are strips of flexible plastic
j_s(2)
The biggest issues that would prevent me from getting something like this for those in my family who wear bracelets is the lack of color customizing and bulkiness of the bot. But I like the idea and I'm guessing both of these issues will be worked on in the future.
I want to be cynical because I hate the idea that a gadget has to have "jewel" in the name and be a fancy "friendship bracelet" to appeal to girls. But it's a neat little trinket that somebody worked hard on, and if it really was a young woman who designed it to enjoy with their friends, I can't really hold that against them. I don't think scaring away guys from it by saying it's "for girls" is doing them any favors though.
Thinking back though, one gadget I remember being very appealing to kids of both sexes was Tamagotchi. It would be cool if someone made a more customizeable/programmable/less annoying version those in a wearable format.
Thinking back though, one gadget I remember being very appealing to kids of both sexes was Tamagotchi. It would be cool if someone made a more customizeable/programmable/less annoying version those in a wearable format.
I hear you. If you think of it as a way to appeal to feminine girls instead of all girls, it makes more sense. I know gender neutral coding toys already exist, but I think there's room (and a place) for super feminine ones too!
Whenever I have to buy a kid a present, I try to aim for the fun yet educational toys, regardless of which gender its marketed to, but not everyone does that.
I know people who will buy a random pink toy from the girls' toy aisle if they need a present for a girl, regardless what it is. Its pink, so it must be appropriate for a girl. The present giver feels like they did their job.
I think the mere existence of feminine coding toys will increase the chances of girls ending up with any sort of coding toy, which is the goal, right?
I know people who will buy a random pink toy from the girls' toy aisle if they need a present for a girl, regardless what it is. Its pink, so it must be appropriate for a girl. The present giver feels like they did their job.
I think the mere existence of feminine coding toys will increase the chances of girls ending up with any sort of coding toy, which is the goal, right?
I actually like the idea that the gadget is positioned for "women in tech" without being about "women in tech". Last thing we need is another one of those panels, in lieu of what the individuals actually built or did.
Do you have a daughter? Girls like girly shit. It's nice that they don't have to, but they usually do.
Technology Will Save Us ship a similar product that is more gender neutral if anyone is interested.
Actually think in this space the norm is actively going gender neutral.
Actually think in this space the norm is actively going gender neutral.
Yeah, with a different 'face', I think boys would think this was cool too. I know 9 year old me though 'secret codes' were very cool, so I'd have probably been into it.
Hi! We talked to over 200 girls when making this product, rest assured that every design decision was made with their feedback in mind.
Boys also love playing with Jewelbots, but there are already a lot of coding toys aimed at boys!!! Our market primarily identifies as female, but we'll broaden down the road.
Boys also love playing with Jewelbots, but there are already a lot of coding toys aimed at boys!!! Our market primarily identifies as female, but we'll broaden down the road.
I think this is where we disagree a little. I don't think most coding toys actually are mostly aimed at boys. How would that even work? Do they require a Y chromosome to operate or something? They're just marketed to boys (and parents of boys), and parents and children alike buy in. The toy market today is highly segregated in marketing to boys vs girls, and toys that were not specifically "gendered" in the past are in the "Boys" section today (or sometimes vice versa).
For example, I know that when I was a kid I hated that any trip to McD's included me awkwardly going up to the front counter to exchange for the "boy" toys because I thought windup toys were more fun than dolls or pink bracelets or whatever. My favorite toys were things like beyblades, zoids, k'nex you know, things that I could build with and would move.
I was never not a girl for finding toys marketed to boys as more fun. I just knew that the toys that were in the "boys" section were more stimulating to me (and my sister felt the same too). I was lucky enough to have parents who didn't care, but some do and it just creates a cycle where girls say they prefer things that are targeted to girls (as opposed to the large number of toys that are only marketed to boys), and market researchers see that success and double-down, just making more stereotypically "girly" toys that sell to that defined market segment instead of making more gender-neutral toys with more inclusive ads (because they're afraid that advertising to girls will scare off boys).
So that's my concern here. I'm glad that girls and boys alike love jewelbots already, but do fear that explicitly saying that they are "for girls" will implicitly give credence to the idea that other toys are "for boys". As engineers we should not promote the idea that science toys without sparkles or pink on them are for boys, it should just be for kids. It limits the range of creative exploration available to girls who are trying to learn both science, and who they are and what conforming to social pressure allows if you tell them that they need to like girl oriented toys b/c everything else is for boys.
For example, I know that when I was a kid I hated that any trip to McD's included me awkwardly going up to the front counter to exchange for the "boy" toys because I thought windup toys were more fun than dolls or pink bracelets or whatever. My favorite toys were things like beyblades, zoids, k'nex you know, things that I could build with and would move.
I was never not a girl for finding toys marketed to boys as more fun. I just knew that the toys that were in the "boys" section were more stimulating to me (and my sister felt the same too). I was lucky enough to have parents who didn't care, but some do and it just creates a cycle where girls say they prefer things that are targeted to girls (as opposed to the large number of toys that are only marketed to boys), and market researchers see that success and double-down, just making more stereotypically "girly" toys that sell to that defined market segment instead of making more gender-neutral toys with more inclusive ads (because they're afraid that advertising to girls will scare off boys).
So that's my concern here. I'm glad that girls and boys alike love jewelbots already, but do fear that explicitly saying that they are "for girls" will implicitly give credence to the idea that other toys are "for boys". As engineers we should not promote the idea that science toys without sparkles or pink on them are for boys, it should just be for kids. It limits the range of creative exploration available to girls who are trying to learn both science, and who they are and what conforming to social pressure allows if you tell them that they need to like girl oriented toys b/c everything else is for boys.
Far be it for me to be prescriptive about what girls and boys should like. Truly, we think of ourselves as more "feminine" in design. Some boys like things that are feminine, there are many people that identify as feminine.
We are here to change the number of coders that identify as female. In order to do that, we talked to a lot (over 200!) of kids that identify as female and built what they asked us to build.
You can read more about our reasoning here: https://medium.com/jewelbots-weblog/what-if-we-could-build-m...
and my view on femininity here: https://medium.com/thelist/papas-please-let-your-babies-grow...
Thank you for your feedback and thoughts, these conversations are super important if we are going to change the number of women in computer science.
We are here to change the number of coders that identify as female. In order to do that, we talked to a lot (over 200!) of kids that identify as female and built what they asked us to build.
You can read more about our reasoning here: https://medium.com/jewelbots-weblog/what-if-we-could-build-m...
and my view on femininity here: https://medium.com/thelist/papas-please-let-your-babies-grow...
Thank you for your feedback and thoughts, these conversations are super important if we are going to change the number of women in computer science.
Thanks for sharing your reasoning. I can't say I'm on the same page when it comes to femininity, though there's no reason to get into that here. I do see where you're coming from and appreciate the time and effort you're putting towards making it a reality. It is a pretty cool product to boot. If you ever do a programmable digital pet, I'll be all over that.
Thank you! I respect your opinion as well, it's great to hear it. We all have our own version of feminism, and everyone is working towards similar goals. Man, making the next Tamagotchi would be amazing, I wonder if anyone has started?
You might like to check out my other reply re:virtual pets... :)
Also, if you haven't already, you might be interested in researching Dr. Janese Swanson the founder of the "GirlTech" toy company (from mid-90s to early 2000s, I think) and maybe even trying to get in contact with her as she might have some valuable insight/opinions/contacts from her own experience for you.
I always appreciated the perspective that Pam Fox shared in her "I’m A Barbie Girl In A CS World" presentation:
* https://www.slideshare.net/wuzziwug/im-a-barbie-girl-in-a-cs... * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIhPYefRndc
How's your experience of the Nordic nRF51822 been? My impression has been that they have some great technology but their tooling/SDK support doesn't seem to put much weight on easing transition from one SDK/IC version to another.
Also, if you haven't already, you might be interested in researching Dr. Janese Swanson the founder of the "GirlTech" toy company (from mid-90s to early 2000s, I think) and maybe even trying to get in contact with her as she might have some valuable insight/opinions/contacts from her own experience for you.
I always appreciated the perspective that Pam Fox shared in her "I’m A Barbie Girl In A CS World" presentation:
* https://www.slideshare.net/wuzziwug/im-a-barbie-girl-in-a-cs... * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIhPYefRndc
How's your experience of the Nordic nRF51822 been? My impression has been that they have some great technology but their tooling/SDK support doesn't seem to put much weight on easing transition from one SDK/IC version to another.
Doooo iiitttt!!! :D
Imagine if it evolved differently based on how you programmed it and other virtual pets you encountered.
Could be really fun, but I understand if you have too much on your plate as is!
Imagine if it evolved differently based on how you programmed it and other virtual pets you encountered.
Could be really fun, but I understand if you have too much on your plate as is!
FWIW a number of years ago I created a concept for a virtual pet toy that was aimed at exploring alternate approaches which might encourage girls--who may not have been previously interested--to learn to code and other computer science related concepts (such as state machines).
One interesting aspect that GoldieBlox's research mentioned was that they found girls became more engaged when there was a story with a purpose (e.g. help this puppy) or opportunity for story-telling.
This made me wonder if there would be potential for combining an already popular electronic toy concept (virtual pets) with a programming environment that was also a story-telling environment. The behavior of the pet would be determined by a state machine generated from the story.
For example:
I ended up getting a bit distracted by the more generic question of how to produce a platform of enclosures & electronics that would enable people to prototype hand-held Arduino-based devices. (And then other things.) But I still think the idea is worth exploring.
Some online notes on these two projects:
* http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/project-pet-designer-to...
* http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/project-arduino-enclosu...
Offers of investment and/or consulting welcomed. :D
(With regard to a non-gendered Computer Science curriculum "Computer Science Unplugged" might be of interest: http://csunplugged.org/ )
One interesting aspect that GoldieBlox's research mentioned was that they found girls became more engaged when there was a story with a purpose (e.g. help this puppy) or opportunity for story-telling.
This made me wonder if there would be potential for combining an already popular electronic toy concept (virtual pets) with a programming environment that was also a story-telling environment. The behavior of the pet would be determined by a state machine generated from the story.
For example:
Hello my name is [Oinky].
When I am [tired] I [sometimes] want to [play].
When I am [hungry] I [always] want to [eat].
I ended up getting a bit distracted by the more generic question of how to produce a platform of enclosures & electronics that would enable people to prototype hand-held Arduino-based devices. (And then other things.) But I still think the idea is worth exploring.
Some online notes on these two projects:
* http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/project-pet-designer-to...
* http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/project-arduino-enclosu...
Offers of investment and/or consulting welcomed. :D
(With regard to a non-gendered Computer Science curriculum "Computer Science Unplugged" might be of interest: http://csunplugged.org/ )
If only Jewelbots and Arduboy[0] had a baby device together...
Maybe they should start by putting a ring on it, arduboy already made a (precious) bluetooth one [1]
[0] https://arduboy.com [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDXsLxPPB88
[0] https://arduboy.com [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDXsLxPPB88
I don't think the problem is that girls don't want to code, we males are just crap at encouraging girls and even mentally abusing women trying to work in tech-jobs. This shows up on the news pretty often still.
Just look at the early days of computers, it was a womans job :-)
Just look at the early days of computers, it was a womans job :-)
> mostly aimed at boys.
>They're just marketed to boys.
To me that is the definition of aimed at. Designed for stereotypical boy activities, marketed to boys. What does it mean to you?
>They're just marketed to boys.
To me that is the definition of aimed at. Designed for stereotypical boy activities, marketed to boys. What does it mean to you?
I think you're both actually agreeing. The other coding toys are marketed towards boys ("aimed at boys").
That means that it's less likely for girls to get exposed to them overall, because media aimed at them is different, teacher's behavior towards them is different, even their own parents' behavior towards them is different.
I get that marketing "for girls" might give credence to the "for boys" marketing... but if you look at the jewelbots page, the only point that is explicitly "girls" is the fact that the kids in the pictures are girls.
Everything else has been brought in by us. The "jewel = girls" aspect, the "friendship bracelet = girls" aspect... though some other media is even more pointed at that. Bit mixed feelings about it. I feel like it's trying to operate within the weird gender divide that exists in our society
That means that it's less likely for girls to get exposed to them overall, because media aimed at them is different, teacher's behavior towards them is different, even their own parents' behavior towards them is different.
I get that marketing "for girls" might give credence to the "for boys" marketing... but if you look at the jewelbots page, the only point that is explicitly "girls" is the fact that the kids in the pictures are girls.
Everything else has been brought in by us. The "jewel = girls" aspect, the "friendship bracelet = girls" aspect... though some other media is even more pointed at that. Bit mixed feelings about it. I feel like it's trying to operate within the weird gender divide that exists in our society
Oh, I definitely think we're more in agreement than disagreement and am happy this product exists.
But you're right that the crux of my argument hangs on explicit "for girls" implying other toys as "for boys"
The reason I interpreted the "for girls" thing as explicit because: 1. When I first clicked the link, the HN title did say "for girls" in the title. It was edited by the time I had submitted my comment. 2. The GMA quote featured on the page advertises it as "One of the Smartest Gadgets for Girls" 3. The quote saying " Jewelbots serves girls. The future scientists, lawyers, mothers, doctors, and engineers of the world." at the bottom of the page. 4. The creator saying that other code toys were aimed at boys (which I agree could be a comment on the adverstising, but I took as a comment on the design of the toys).
Because I took "for girls" as an explicit design consideration for the reasons above, I also assumed that the "jewel" and "friendship bracelet" aspects were design choices to explicitly appeal to girls, rather than just parts of the toy that girls happen to like more than boys on average.
I would be happy to be wrong on this though. I just struggle to see how this changes the narrative of science/engineering toys for girls needing to be overtly feminine-themed while most functionally equivalent toys without those aspects are assumed to be for boys. Perhaps I'm not in tune with the market well enough, but I struggle to identify equivalently overtly-masculine themed coding toys from companies who say their mission is to help boys.
But you're right that the crux of my argument hangs on explicit "for girls" implying other toys as "for boys"
The reason I interpreted the "for girls" thing as explicit because: 1. When I first clicked the link, the HN title did say "for girls" in the title. It was edited by the time I had submitted my comment. 2. The GMA quote featured on the page advertises it as "One of the Smartest Gadgets for Girls" 3. The quote saying " Jewelbots serves girls. The future scientists, lawyers, mothers, doctors, and engineers of the world." at the bottom of the page. 4. The creator saying that other code toys were aimed at boys (which I agree could be a comment on the adverstising, but I took as a comment on the design of the toys).
Because I took "for girls" as an explicit design consideration for the reasons above, I also assumed that the "jewel" and "friendship bracelet" aspects were design choices to explicitly appeal to girls, rather than just parts of the toy that girls happen to like more than boys on average.
I would be happy to be wrong on this though. I just struggle to see how this changes the narrative of science/engineering toys for girls needing to be overtly feminine-themed while most functionally equivalent toys without those aspects are assumed to be for boys. Perhaps I'm not in tune with the market well enough, but I struggle to identify equivalently overtly-masculine themed coding toys from companies who say their mission is to help boys.
I don't understand why you would expect anyone to say "this is for boys" when producing a toy that is generally considered to skew male. Try looking at Meccano, for instance - I've never seen them say "boys" but I'd bet money that most Americans see a racecar/truck/etc kit and think boy.
Weird gender divide? They are operating within social norms so it isn't a divide or weird to most people.
> I don't think most coding toys actually are mostly aimed at boys ... They're just marketed to boys ...
Aren't "aimed at boys" and "marketed to boys" pretty much the same thing?
Aren't "aimed at boys" and "marketed to boys" pretty much the same thing?
I was at a conference this weekend. A female grade school teacher, at a private school, tried to explain to me how "girls brains are wired differently from boys" and therefore "we need to teach girls to be more like boys."
I am open minded. I've met and worked with women who are just as strong or stronger than men.
I don't understand how we can simultaneously argue that men and women are fundamentally different but should also be made to be the same.
Back to the thread, why wouldn't a boy want to play with this new toy? Or wear pink?
I am open minded. I've met and worked with women who are just as strong or stronger than men.
I don't understand how we can simultaneously argue that men and women are fundamentally different but should also be made to be the same.
Back to the thread, why wouldn't a boy want to play with this new toy? Or wear pink?
Hi! That grade school teacher needs a few more science lessons.
We have lots of users that identify as male. Boys love Jewelbots, two weeks ago at an event a boy came up to me after to tell me "this was more fun than coding Minecraft". Best compliment in a while.
We have lots of users that identify as male. Boys love Jewelbots, two weeks ago at an event a boy came up to me after to tell me "this was more fun than coding Minecraft". Best compliment in a while.
> Boys love Jewelbots, two weeks ago at an event a boy came up to me after to tell me "this was more fun than coding Minecraft". Best compliment in a while.
Yeah because its the coding part which makes it interesting to most boys.
It's like if you created a GI Barbie character (which is basically a Barbie doll with a gun) then boys would love it too, that doesn't necessarily mean that they love Barbie, they just love a different aspect of it.
Although I do agree that Jewelbot (by integrating elements girls would like with coding) can get them excited into coding.
Also see Adafruit's products, they are electronics and DIY supply company run by mostly women and they do super cool things things which are interesting to girls. My favorite one was when they embedded a NFC token on their nail using nail polish, and then program it to unlock their phone by just holding it.
Yeah because its the coding part which makes it interesting to most boys.
It's like if you created a GI Barbie character (which is basically a Barbie doll with a gun) then boys would love it too, that doesn't necessarily mean that they love Barbie, they just love a different aspect of it.
Although I do agree that Jewelbot (by integrating elements girls would like with coding) can get them excited into coding.
Also see Adafruit's products, they are electronics and DIY supply company run by mostly women and they do super cool things things which are interesting to girls. My favorite one was when they embedded a NFC token on their nail using nail polish, and then program it to unlock their phone by just holding it.
Identify as or are boys biologically?
It would seem rude for a toy maker to be asking children for their gender as assigned at birth (which is what I assume you mean) so they probably don't know.
As general practice, I never ask people about their genitals.
You don't have to ask about their genitals but given you claim boys like jewelbots (which they very well might do) I think it's pretty relevent to understand whether those are biological boys or simply biological girls identifying as boys.
One would be less interesting than the other. Here is why.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/the-astonishin...
One would be less interesting than the other. Here is why.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/the-astonishin...
I guess I am questioning what the point of asking for gender is, to begin with.
Not sure I get the whole identify as a boy in this context.
Not sure I get the whole identify as a boy in this context.
Did they say they asked? I thought that comment just indicated that they had noticed. And since you are the person who brought up the concept of identifying as a boy in this context, I don't think anyone else can tell you why it might have seemed relevant.
"We have lots of users that identify as male."
this was the comment I was referring to.
this was the comment I was referring to.
Well apparently the whole product is aimed at a specific gender (girls) so asking what gender users identify as doesn't seem entirely out of scope?
I am not sure exactly what gender identity rule I have broken for asking my original question but I find it pretty interesting whether those who identify as a girl also are girls biologically but identify as boys or whether they are biologically born boys.
The reasons I asked was because it was claimed that many of those who use it identify as boys.
Maybe I am alone in thinking this is an important distinction but none the less I find it pretty relevant to what to make out of it in the grander scheme of this discussion.
The reasons I asked was because it was claimed that many of those who use it identify as boys.
Maybe I am alone in thinking this is an important distinction but none the less I find it pretty relevant to what to make out of it in the grander scheme of this discussion.
How do you know the teacher is wrong based on science? Do you have citations?
"Boys and girls are wired differently" seems like an eminently plausible statement -- it applies to the rest of our bodies, so why not to our brains? I don't think it can be rejected out of hand without a solid argument (or reputable studies) to the contrary.
"Boys and girls are wired differently" seems like an eminently plausible statement -- it applies to the rest of our bodies, so why not to our brains? I don't think it can be rejected out of hand without a solid argument (or reputable studies) to the contrary.
It's so vague as to be unfalsifiable, and therefore an unscientific claim. By the same reasoning, it's plausible that our brains are powered by yet undiscovered magic.
The teacher made a nonsense, and unscientific claim. Do you have citations to back up your "argument", or are you just trolling?
The teacher made a nonsense, and unscientific claim. Do you have citations to back up your "argument", or are you just trolling?
I'm not claiming that my argument is correct and hence I don't need citations. I'm merely claiming that it's intuitively plausible enough that it doesn't make sense to dismiss out of hand as obviously wrong.
I'm responding that lots of things are intuitively plausible, because that's an incredibly low bar. When you're trying to make decisions about how to educate people for example, leaning on presuppositions that are just "intuitively plausible" is lazy thinking and I would argue that for any serious matter you should dismiss out of hand such lazy thinking.
Well, I agree :). I don't want it to appear that I'm claiming there are differences in brain structure on average between men and women -- I'm just curious what science has been done.
> "Boys and girls are wired differently" seems like an eminently plausible statement
That premise, while perhaps controversial in some corners, seems essential problematic than the conclusion it was offered to support (which it doesn't.)
That premise, while perhaps controversial in some corners, seems essential problematic than the conclusion it was offered to support (which it doesn't.)
> A female grade school teacher, at a private school, tried to explain to me how "girls brains are wired differently from boys"
While an oversimplification, this seems to be generally true; females are biologically different than males and those differences seems to have psychological/behavioral manifestations.
Its still difficult to isolate socialization effects from biological ones, but the indications seem to be that there are real, biologically grounded differences.
> and therefore "we need to teach girls to be more like boys."
Wait, what? Wouldn't that be a reason to stop trying to do that, at least where those biological grounded differences have strong effects?
While an oversimplification, this seems to be generally true; females are biologically different than males and those differences seems to have psychological/behavioral manifestations.
Its still difficult to isolate socialization effects from biological ones, but the indications seem to be that there are real, biologically grounded differences.
> and therefore "we need to teach girls to be more like boys."
Wait, what? Wouldn't that be a reason to stop trying to do that, at least where those biological grounded differences have strong effects?
I personally agree that women are biologically different than men. But, I don't know what the correct next conclusion is. (Not to mention when you extend it to gender self-identification.)
One of her specific examples was "because of that different wiring, boys will typically try to win a game, but many times girls will not try to win, because, for example, winning might hurt the other player's feelings."
All I could say in response was, "well, I'm a guy, and to me it sounds like those girls are thinking at a higher level -- who cares about winning some artificial game, if it's going to hurt another person." And that's where the bulk of the conversation ended.
I struggle to find the right path when discussing gender -- especially about kids.
One of her specific examples was "because of that different wiring, boys will typically try to win a game, but many times girls will not try to win, because, for example, winning might hurt the other player's feelings."
All I could say in response was, "well, I'm a guy, and to me it sounds like those girls are thinking at a higher level -- who cares about winning some artificial game, if it's going to hurt another person." And that's where the bulk of the conversation ended.
I struggle to find the right path when discussing gender -- especially about kids.
Care to expand on which toys are made with only boys in mind?
Goldieblox does the same thing. Everything is stereotypically girly.
You have to assume they did some research and that's what girls want.
You have to assume they did some research and that's what girls want.
What do girls want? (after being socialized for their entire young lives to only express and develop interests in traditionally "feminine" pursuits) might turn out to be a quite different question from What's the best way to encourage girls to see themselves as being equally capable as boys in technical areas?"
This x100.
There seems to be a popular notion that "feminine" traits are innate and universal to people with a "feminine identity", rather than the product of culture with socialization that treats female people consistently differently than male people from birth. However if you think about things that prepare someone for technical success, so-called "feminine" traits like caring about your appearance more than is actually necessary (makeup and jewelry serve no real purpose and take time and money) or being uncomfortable with conflict (bias for cooperation vs competition, people seeing assertive women as aggressive) are not good things that will help you be equal to or surpass your male peers in technical pursuits.
I can understand why it's uncomfortable to imply that the concept of "femininity" is not a positive one when it comes to tech (the creator of this probably disagrees with my assesment). But I hope we can continue to question the validity of "feminine" social constructs while also creating products like this, which bridge the gap after socialization has taken its toll.
There seems to be a popular notion that "feminine" traits are innate and universal to people with a "feminine identity", rather than the product of culture with socialization that treats female people consistently differently than male people from birth. However if you think about things that prepare someone for technical success, so-called "feminine" traits like caring about your appearance more than is actually necessary (makeup and jewelry serve no real purpose and take time and money) or being uncomfortable with conflict (bias for cooperation vs competition, people seeing assertive women as aggressive) are not good things that will help you be equal to or surpass your male peers in technical pursuits.
I can understand why it's uncomfortable to imply that the concept of "femininity" is not a positive one when it comes to tech (the creator of this probably disagrees with my assesment). But I hope we can continue to question the validity of "feminine" social constructs while also creating products like this, which bridge the gap after socialization has taken its toll.
Hi! I wrote all about this, you can read my thoughts here.
https://medium.com/thelist/papas-please-let-your-babies-grow...
https://medium.com/thelist/papas-please-let-your-babies-grow...
I actually read it right before writing that comment above! It was the primary motivating factor for me providing some examples of how I've noticed that femininity can be negative in regards to tech.
That all being said, I don't knock anyone as an individual for liking what they like. I also recognize that there are reasons for the disparity of women in tech other than gender role conformity due to socialization. It's just one I think deserves more credit than it gets.
That all being said, I don't knock anyone as an individual for liking what they like. I also recognize that there are reasons for the disparity of women in tech other than gender role conformity due to socialization. It's just one I think deserves more credit than it gets.
I didn't notice the user name! Sorry for beating a dead horse.
There is a lot of "toxic femininity" I'm with you on that.
There is a lot of "toxic femininity" I'm with you on that.
> But I hope we can continue to question the validity of "feminine" social constructs while also creating products like this, which bridge the gap after socialization has taken its toll.
Yep, just because this product doesn't fix all society's problems related to pushing gender norms on children doesn't mean it's not worth doing.
Yep, just because this product doesn't fix all society's problems related to pushing gender norms on children doesn't mean it's not worth doing.
Maybe by giving girls what they want in order to get the damn thing into their hands, this product is exposing them to technical challenges that will improve their confidence, causing them to see themselves as being equally capable as boys in technical areas?
> You have to assume they did some research and that's what girls want.
Or they did some research and that's what potential members of the target audience who aren't already buying into existing products of the same type aside from consideration of the gender-orientation of marketing want.
That those people are largely girls is, well, kind of beside the point: why compete in a crowded market when by marketing in a particular way you can compete in a more open niche.
Or they did some research and that's what potential members of the target audience who aren't already buying into existing products of the same type aside from consideration of the gender-orientation of marketing want.
That those people are largely girls is, well, kind of beside the point: why compete in a crowded market when by marketing in a particular way you can compete in a more open niche.
How are they not competing in a crowded market?
Anyone who is active in the NYC JS scene knows Sara Chipps, the CEO of Jewelbots.
She has given a couple talks about what it takes to run a hardware startup, and has been
a wonderful member of the community. I only wish her and co. the best of success with everything they have put together, the new version looks great!
Sara Chipps (Jewelbots) | Navigating the Hardware World with Software Experience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HKzQ00MZMs (Jun 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HKzQ00MZMs (Jun 2016)
This is so kind, thank you!!
She also started GirlDevelopIt and has been a staple in the NYC community for a while. Happy to see her on here!
<3!!
pls2halp(1)
my company shared an office with the Jewelbots team and I was very impressed at the user testing they did. The bracelet is a great user-programmable product for 8-14 year olds, which is really a difficult age group to design for.
[deleted]
Wow, this is awesome! I wish I had these when I was a kid.
[deleted](1)
This reminds me of the badges at Queercon that are specifically made to interact with each other via radios or physical connection.
https://hackaday.com/2017/08/07/inside-this-years-queercon-b...
[deleted]
Cool site and congrats to this team! Love the idea and the execution.
The idea by itself is pretty great, however I think the site could do better at conveying what a Jewelbot can do. Apparently it has lights and vibration and it can communicate wirelessly- what else? Would it be possible to use it as a smart token / have it interact with other gadgets? Also, would you consider designing a version with a little embedded LCD screen to go with the programmable LEDs?
I was able to get in on the kickstarter and while I'm far from the target market I've found this a lot fun to play with. It's like an arduino with decent bluetooth and a tiny form factor.
I know some people on the team, they're great. But I also have a long history of working with microcontrollers in a semi educational setting (http://nodebots.io) and these are by far the least frustrating way to use wireless anything I've come across.
I know some people on the team, they're great. But I also have a long history of working with microcontrollers in a semi educational setting (http://nodebots.io) and these are by far the least frustrating way to use wireless anything I've come across.
Well, I thought this would be the perfect Christmas gift for my 10 year old daughter, but $99 is just too much (at least for my budget). This does seem to be a great idea. Maybe they'll come out with a cheaper version at some point.
Hi! If you want, you could use the code FACEBOOK for 25% off. I don't know if that gets closer to your budget. If not, email me at sara[at]jewelbots.com. Our goal is to get as many of these into little hands as possible.
Congratulations on launch and I really, really want you guys to succeed.
However, the copy below is a little off-putting.
>Jewelbots patent pending bluetooth connection takes friendship to the next level by responding to your besties whenever you are together.
a) What's the patentable invention here? If it's a programmable watch or something like that, I'd be very scared. b) Your target audience should be encouraged to share and experiment, which is the opposite of what the currently broken patent system does.
I'm not complaining about the fact that you have patents as much as the advertising that you hold them.
However, the copy below is a little off-putting.
>Jewelbots patent pending bluetooth connection takes friendship to the next level by responding to your besties whenever you are together.
a) What's the patentable invention here? If it's a programmable watch or something like that, I'd be very scared. b) Your target audience should be encouraged to share and experiment, which is the opposite of what the currently broken patent system does.
I'm not complaining about the fact that you have patents as much as the advertising that you hold them.
Hi! Our patent covers the ability to communicate from wearable to wearable using BLE. I hope that he fact that we're completely open source, from hardware to firmware to software, encourages others to share.
As far as advertising, I get that. Feedback received. Thanks.
As far as advertising, I get that. Feedback received. Thanks.
"Our patent covers the ability to communicate from wearable to wearable using BLE"
What?? So you took an open standard (BLE) others have made available for you that is designed for such applications in mind, stuffed it into generic item (bracelet) and want to patent it? So if I wanted to make BLE connected socks I owe you royalty? Sorry, but in such case, I sincerely hope your patent will be thwarted.
What?? So you took an open standard (BLE) others have made available for you that is designed for such applications in mind, stuffed it into generic item (bracelet) and want to patent it? So if I wanted to make BLE connected socks I owe you royalty? Sorry, but in such case, I sincerely hope your patent will be thwarted.
That shouldn't be patentable. Bluetooth's entire purpose is to serve as a means for devices to communicate.
It's like patenting idea of using TCP/IP to send packets of data over a computer network.
While I second the first commenter in hoping that you succeed, I also really hope you never get that patent. That's almost as bad as Apple patenting rounded rectangles.
> That's almost as bad as Apple patenting rounded rectangles.
It's worse. The rounded rectangle patent was a design patent, by the wording used above I'm guessing they're after a utility patent.
It's worse. The rounded rectangle patent was a design patent, by the wording used above I'm guessing they're after a utility patent.
Open source licenses traditionally have give permission for people to do what would otherwise be prohibited by copyright law; i.e. copying, modifying and redistributing the software. But if you have a patent, people are still forbidden from doing that, by patent law.
The way out for you would be to use one of the license texts which include a patent grant in addition to copyright license; e.g. either the GPLv3 or Apache 2 licenses.
Of course, if you do that, one could well ask what you wanted the patent for in the first place.
The way out for you would be to use one of the license texts which include a patent grant in addition to copyright license; e.g. either the GPLv3 or Apache 2 licenses.
Of course, if you do that, one could well ask what you wanted the patent for in the first place.
[deleted]
I think it's:
a. a very cool product
b. a good strategy to get more girls interested in CS
If my "girl" was still 13 she and her friends would want to have these.
If my "girl" was still 13 she and her friends would want to have these.
My niece could really like this. She's really into "girly" stuff like princesses and flouncy dresses. Something where she programs her jewelry will be far more interesting to her than something where she programs a race car.
I'm all for making it more appealing for everyone to learn to code, but I was torn over this product by a comment made by Sara Chipps on the Giant Robots podcast (http://giantrobots.fm/246).
One of the use cases she mentions is "...4 buzzes means the guy you like is nearby...".
One of the use cases she mentions is "...4 buzzes means the guy you like is nearby...".
> Learn to code->it will help you get a guy.
I don't think I reasonable person would get this from the quote you posted. Does it even appear in any of the material on the site? Or was it an off the cuff example in an interview? Regardless, I'm unclear on why this is offensive, can you elaborate?
I don't think I reasonable person would get this from the quote you posted. Does it even appear in any of the material on the site? Or was it an off the cuff example in an interview? Regardless, I'm unclear on why this is offensive, can you elaborate?
I guess the simplification I drew may not apply to everyone (edited). The off the cuff example given in the interview seemed to reinforce the idea that middleschool girls should be worried about guys and that didn't seem very empowering to me.
I understand where you are coming from and I appreciate the thought, but - if you think about it from a teenager's perspective - it's a very relatable example. Teens will be teens, and they will communicate about that kind of stuff no matter what. If I had daughters, I'd be really proud if they programmed their own little protocol rather than just sending paper notes back and forth :)
Super admirable goal and super tough task. Kudos on the progress!
Unfortunately, we don't live in that world yet (and it could be a while off) In the meantime, I can now buy a product that:
1. Encourages my girls to get into STEM. 2. Is not a hard sell.
My girls are socialized to like girly stuff. I am only partly responsible for this - the outside pressures and influences on my children are huge and very hard to resist.
So you could argue that this product is a compromise, but it's one I'll gladly make.