7 ms·
Eh. Most major centers of power have large computing resources changing how they do things. Wal-Mart, for instance, as a basically non-tech company, leveraged c
by theonemind 8y ago
Eh. Most major centers of power have large computing resources changing how they do things. Wal-Mart, for instance, as a basically non-tech company, leveraged computers for stocking and supply chains and became a culture-chaging retail giant. Computers have made their way into cars, and even toasters. We have high frequency trading (done by computers) majorly affecting markets. I could probably go on like this for a while. Eating the world, check.
As for not hard--I don't know. We have an unusually high paying career, which companies do not do out of the generosity of their hearts. They have a limited supply of people that can do it. Quite a few people show no aptitude at all. At the high end, it merges into pure computer science, with an essentially unlimited amount to know. So, you can draw badly, or become a professional artist. Certainly, a person can program badly, but I don't think you can call it "not hard" any more than you can call anything else "not hard".
I wouldn't, and don't, romanticize it. It often just sucks. And programmers can often come with pointless, inflated egos from some view that they do something special, and I would like to see a check on that and those pointless egos deflated. But "not eating the world" and "not hard" don't really check out, from my perspective.
- Retric 8y agoMost professions have already changed the world. Air conditioning for example dramacily changed how and where people work and play. Plumbing has dramatically reduced the spread of disease. The older professions are so integral to society it’s hard to thing of a world before agriculture or fishing. Give it 200 years and programming will probably be thought of as accounting. Well paid and nessisarily, but hardly revolutionary. PS: Salaries have generally stagnated over the last 10 years suggesting supply and demand are well matched. Their is a lot of stratification, but most programmers make well under six figures.
- postmeta 8y agoProgramming is more a meta-profession, it tries to automate and eliminate the boring or repetitive part of all professions. I don't think we can ever standardize programming any more than we can standardize humanity's collective goals and ambitions.
- Retric 8y agoHigh level languages standardized assembly. Tools have increased the amount of knowledge you need to function as a programmer, but they also provide standard solutions to real problems. It’s not like CSS is nessisary for building a website, but it really does both help and replace a lot of custom code. Plumbers still need to get things to work in your house, but tools and techniques have largely removed guesswork. The end point will be different than accounting, but I feel the trend is clear with knowledge replacing the need for extreme generic problem solving skills. ‘Design Patterns’ are of real though limited value, that’s a meta example of exactly what I am talking about.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- torgian 8y agoSalaries have been stagnating because companies refuse to raise the salaries, along with ever increasing inflation. Your 100k job was worth less than a dollar back in 1980, due to inflation. Programmers should be making closer to 200-300k per year; but then everyone else would be making 30 or 40 dollars an hour minimum wage. Supply and demand aren’t well matched, considering the job posting out there. But there’s a lot going on influencing all of this
- badpun 8y agoI wouldn’t call Wal-Mart a “center of power”. They’re essentially a market player, and are powerless in the face of market forces. CIA, Kremlin, or even Wall Street (with their ability to extract wealth out of society via laws paid for in bribes) are centers of power, in the way that they really get to impose their will on others.