5 ms·
Your first point rubs me the wrong way. The implicit assumption is "there exists some lesser class of humans incapable of doing the work we do". All of my expe
by lordCarbonFiber 10y ago
Your first point rubs me the wrong way. The implicit assumption is "there exists some lesser class of humans incapable of doing the work we do".
All of my experience, every success of outreach programs bringing new people to tech, everything we know about the distribution of IQ suggests that it's not the case. There is plenty of room in the future economy for more knowledge workers and we shouldn't be making the assumption that people should let their mind rot doing work better suited for machines.
- cblock811 10y agoTo his point, if they don't have the desire or willingness...that's an issue. Just because he called out that some people aren't going to work out in tech doesnt mean he is assigning them to a lesser class. I certainly dont have the aptitude, desire, or willingness to be many things. Doesnt mean I think I'm less of a person for it.
- Animats 10y agoThere is plenty of room in the future economy for more knowledge workers... Maybe not. About half of new US college graduates take jobs that don't require a college degree. We may need fewer "knowledge workers" as AI picks up. We need far fewer paper-pushers and middle managers than were needed in the 1970s. Sales once seemed safe, but consider Amazon and Esurance. That's what the decline of the middle class is all about.
- efaref 10y agoThe fact that you think that people without "the aptitude, desire, or willingness to get a highly technical job" are a "lesser class of humans" says more about you than it does about those people.
- antisthenes 10y agoUmm. What? You can't just hand-wave that without any evidence. All of your experience and every success? What about the failures? What about coding bootcamps that result in failures? You're going to need to cite at least some sources when you say that it's possible to teach _everyone_ a highly technical skill.