I think this presents a flawed logic: "It puts the method before the problem. Before you go rushing out to learn to code, figure out what your problem actually

I think this presents a flawed logic: "It puts the method before the problem. Before you go rushing out to learn to code, figure out what your problem actually is. [...] Does coding solve that problem? Are you sure?" Did we all learn to code, or program, as a reaction to having an idea that required learning to code or program? Or did some of us learn to code or program out of curiosity, or because we just wanted to, or as a hobby? The quoted point discredits the latter in favour of the former (as well as applying all manner of extra requirements I decided to trim out). The article as a whole doesn't respect the fact that people have extra-curricular activities, and hobbies. And side-projects. Should we all discard those things that aren't totally relevant to our full time job?