The frustration and resentment articulated through the comments here towards Bret Victor's post seems to stem from one of two sources: (a) Bret Victor claiming

The frustration and resentment articulated through the comments here towards Bret Victor's post seems to stem from one of two sources: (a) Bret Victor claiming that code.org is implicitly, via quotes from high-profile figures, supporting a misguided view of computer science education that is overly simplistic and suboptimal towards providing the deeper, more nuanced value that programming can teach. (b) Bret Victor himself being simplistic and uncharitable in mocking the quotes by these high-profile figures. I think Bret is correct to point out (a), but the method that he chose to do so lended itself to an acrimonious response by many people who have good intentions, leading to responses towards (b). I myself was initially annoyed by the tone of his post. But after some thought and reflection, I found myself agreeing with the sentiment expressed by this post. I do think that there is a lot more nuance that could have been communicated when it comes to the value of learning programming. The real debate here, I think, is whether it's reasonable to expect a high-profile figure to comment with such sophistication and nuance, especially within the constraints of a short blurb (which is what I would presume is what their PR person and code.org agreed upon). Is it justified to expect such a degree of nuance from high-status figures and organizations, given the context that computer science education is currently in?