2 ms·

Coding is not ‘fun’, it’s technically and ethically complex

2 points by jonbaer 7y ago

smt88 7y ago
This argument came across as pretty silly to me. It seems like he's being hyperbolic to make a point, which is unfortunate because I actually agree that our industry needs to be more responsible for the consequences of our code. To argue against the headline explicitly: coding is not inherently complex, either technically or ethically. You can code an app or game in a browser in the next couple of hours, mostly by copying and pasting internet examples. The technical complexity arrives gradually as either the novelty or the scope of the program increases. If the program is heavily used, technical complexity is almost inevitable. The ethical complexity, however, may never appear. It tends to be tied to promises made about what the program is suitable for. Zoom is a great example. It's not at all unethical to build an unencrypted video chat service, as long as you're clear about that. It is very unethical to build one if you've promised end-to-end encryption. > "Coding isn’t the only job that demands intense focus. But you’d never hear someone say that brain surgery is ‘fun’, or that structural engineering is ‘easy’. When it comes to programming, why do policymakers and technologists pretend otherwise?" Comparing programming to brain surgery or structural engineering is nonsense. You cannot professionally practice either surgery or structural engineering without the opportunity to kill someone. You can easily be a programmer for your whole career without building anything that has life-or-death implications. And then consider your first program: it might be really fun to write it quickly and naively. You might even write it in the first few minutes you're learning to program. But your first brain surgery or structural engineering project is going to be years after your begin learning the skill. Not at all comparable to programming. > "Insisting on the glamour and fun of coding is the wrong way to acquaint kids with computer science. It insults their intelligence and plants the pernicious notion in their heads that you don’t need discipline in order to progress." This is where I realized the author probably has no programming experience. His LinkedIn profile seems to bear this out[1]. Showing kids that something is fun is a great way to acquaint them with it, whether it be computer science, brain surgery, or structural engineering. Obviously they can just jump right in to programming, but it would make sense to get a kid started on the path to medicine or engineering using basic, fun, educational exercises. 1. https://www.linkedin.com/in/waltervannini/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/waltervannini/

2 points by jonbaer 7y ago

This argument came across as pretty silly to me. It seems like he's being hyperbolic to make a point, which is unfortunate because I actually agree that our industry needs to be more responsible for the consequences of our code. To argue against the headline explicitly: coding is not inherently complex, either technically or ethically. You can code an app or game in a browser in the next couple of hours, mostly by copying and pasting internet examples. The technical complexity arrives gradually as either the novelty or the scope of the program increases. If the program is heavily used, technical complexity is almost inevitable. The ethical complexity, however, may never appear. It tends to be tied to promises made about what the program is suitable for. Zoom is a great example. It's not at all unethical to build an unencrypted video chat service, as long as you're clear about that. It is very unethical to build one if you've promised end-to-end encryption. > "Coding isn’t the only job that demands intense focus. But you’d never hear someone say that brain surgery is ‘fun’, or that structural engineering is ‘easy’. When it comes to programming, why do policymakers and technologists pretend otherwise?" Comparing programming to brain surgery or structural engineering is nonsense. You cannot professionally practice either surgery or structural engineering without the opportunity to kill someone. You can easily be a programmer for your whole career without building anything that has life-or-death implications. And then consider your first program: it might be really fun to write it quickly and naively. You might even write it in the first few minutes you're learning to program. But your first brain surgery or structural engineering project is going to be years after your begin learning the skill. Not at all comparable to programming. > "Insisting on the glamour and fun of coding is the wrong way to acquaint kids with computer science. It insults their intelligence and plants the pernicious notion in their heads that you don’t need discipline in order to progress." This is where I realized the author probably has no programming experience. His LinkedIn profile seems to bear this out[1]. Showing kids that something is fun is a great way to acquaint them with it, whether it be computer science, brain surgery, or structural engineering. Obviously they can just jump right in to programming, but it would make sense to get a kid started on the path to medicine or engineering using basic, fun, educational exercises. 1. https://www.linkedin.com/in/waltervannini/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/waltervannini/