48 ms·

This is evidence that programming has become a skill akin to literacy. The migration seems similar to the hypothetical situation in which universities and socie

by leot 12y ago

This is evidence that programming has become a skill akin to literacy. The migration seems similar to the hypothetical situation in which universities and society had primarily been based on an oral tradition of communication, and then this fancy new technology called "writing" appeared (at first only in "Departments of orthography science"). Some of those who majored in "orthography science" would go on to study it, comparing and contrasting the features of phonetic of symbolic writing methods. Many others would learn orthography science because it enabled them to learn and communicate much more efficiently in general. Who wants to place bets on when country development metrics include "population % who know how to code" ... ? I'll wager no later than 2030 :)

noname123 12y ago
Yes. Would love to see programming as a commodity skill as writing so that real programmers can become writers that pursue the medium as an art and human expression rather than entrepreneurship; and entrepreneurship programming standardized and professionalized as accounting or communications fields. And also Theory of Computation moved to mathematics, Bioinformatics moved to the life sciences. Digital humanities into the humanities. And only then CS departments focus on only the aesthetics of software architecture and the interpretation of software code as a testament to the creators' socioeconomic influence of the time and to the academic's present-time critical theories.
tres 12y ago
This is an interesting thought, and I really like how you've expressed it. The metaphor of mediaeval monks to your canonical computer scientist and of the modern university to monasteries is so rich, but you only hint at it. Considering how relatively recent our cultural conversion from orality to literacy was, and how quickly society shifted, your metaphor becomes even more rich and meaningful. Shakespeare stands at the border between the worlds of orality and literacy. Kind of makes me wonder who the Shakespeare of today will be in five-hundred years.
kimdouglasmason 12y ago
I completely disagree. Having everyone knowing how to code is the opposite of specialisation. It's inefficient and pointless. If a certain profession needs a piece of software, it's much more efficient for specialist developers to consult with domain experts, write that software, and sell it into the industry. Having every (for example) doctor being able to code adds negligible value, and I would argue the opportunity cost is awful. If my doctor has a choice to become a very mediocre coder or a better doctor, I would hope they choose the latter. As for the comparison to literacy, there's simply no comparison. Illiterate societies are unable to progress past agrarian economies because illiteracy precludes specialisation, prevents the dissemination of knowledge, and makes it almost impossible to learn new things except by imitation or direct instruction. Literacy is a necessary skill in order to do much beyond dirt farming. Illiterate people can't, for example, even follow a moderately complex checklist. In contrast, I see no negative impact on society if most people can't code. I don't spend my time studying anatomy; my micro-surgeon shouldn't spend his time studying coding, and I don't see how it would do anything but make him less effective if he did. A society of part-time coders would do nothing but produce a lot of badly-written toy programs. What's the point?
- gohrt 12y ago
  > A society of part-time coders would do nothing but produce a lot of badly-written toy programs. What's the point? Maybe you are embarassed by the content of github, but many of us feel it is changing the word for the better. An Excel jockey writing macros -> better spreadsheets. A writer who can analyze and restructure their story, wihout laboriously poring and cutting and pasting -> better stories. There was a time when 'writing' was a specialist activity best left to professionals. Imagine if that never changed? We don't need everyone to be an anatomist, but certainly we should all know enough about our own bodies to feed and exercise them properly. I hope we never live in a world where we only eat what The Nutritionist hands to us, and we only move our bodies in the way The Physiologist instructs us.
  - vezzy-fnord 12y ago
    A writer who can analyze and restructure their story, wihout laboriously poring and cutting and pasting -> better stories. How is this related to knowing how to code?
raverbashing 12y ago
"Who wants to place bets on when country development metrics include "population % who know how to code" ... ? " Oh, an example of how CS people overestimate their importance, how funny. Dentists, doctors don't need to know how to code. Teachers don't need to know how to code. Maybe it's better that they do (some of them, still). The same with other professions. Humanity survived up to the 1980/70s without computers being widespread. Their problems were mostly solved without it. Literacy is something different, you can read a hundred year old English without many issues. It's much more universal than the code being used today. People should learn how to cook for example, before learning how to code.
- kimdouglasmason 12y ago
  Well said. Other things that strike me as more important than knowing how to code, which aren't common knowledge: 1. How our political system works. 2. How the economy works: specifically, what money is, where it comes from, how the banking sector works, and the relationships between money creation, interest rates, asset prices, and incomes. Most people don't understand these things, and that holds our society back far more than not knowing how to code.

by leot 12y ago

noname123 12y ago

Yes. Would love to see programming as a commodity skill as writing so that real programmers can become writers that pursue the medium as an art and human expression rather than entrepreneurship; and entrepreneurship programming standardized and professionalized as accounting or communications fields. And also Theory of Computation moved to mathematics, Bioinformatics moved to the life sciences. Digital humanities into the humanities. And only then CS departments focus on only the aesthetics of software architecture and the interpretation of software code as a testament to the creators' socioeconomic influence of the time and to the academic's present-time critical theories.

tres 12y ago

This is an interesting thought, and I really like how you've expressed it. The metaphor of mediaeval monks to your canonical computer scientist and of the modern university to monasteries is so rich, but you only hint at it. Considering how relatively recent our cultural conversion from orality to literacy was, and how quickly society shifted, your metaphor becomes even more rich and meaningful. Shakespeare stands at the border between the worlds of orality and literacy. Kind of makes me wonder who the Shakespeare of today will be in five-hundred years.

kimdouglasmason 12y ago

I completely disagree. Having everyone knowing how to code is the opposite of specialisation. It's inefficient and pointless. If a certain profession needs a piece of software, it's much more efficient for specialist developers to consult with domain experts, write that software, and sell it into the industry. Having every (for example) doctor being able to code adds negligible value, and I would argue the opportunity cost is awful. If my doctor has a choice to become a very mediocre coder or a better doctor, I would hope they choose the latter. As for the comparison to literacy, there's simply no comparison. Illiterate societies are unable to progress past agrarian economies because illiteracy precludes specialisation, prevents the dissemination of knowledge, and makes it almost impossible to learn new things except by imitation or direct instruction. Literacy is a necessary skill in order to do much beyond dirt farming. Illiterate people can't, for example, even follow a moderately complex checklist. In contrast, I see no negative impact on society if most people can't code. I don't spend my time studying anatomy; my micro-surgeon shouldn't spend his time studying coding, and I don't see how it would do anything but make him less effective if he did. A society of part-time coders would do nothing but produce a lot of badly-written toy programs. What's the point?

gohrt 12y ago
> A society of part-time coders would do nothing but produce a lot of badly-written toy programs. What's the point? Maybe you are embarassed by the content of github, but many of us feel it is changing the word for the better. An Excel jockey writing macros -> better spreadsheets. A writer who can analyze and restructure their story, wihout laboriously poring and cutting and pasting -> better stories. There was a time when 'writing' was a specialist activity best left to professionals. Imagine if that never changed? We don't need everyone to be an anatomist, but certainly we should all know enough about our own bodies to feed and exercise them properly. I hope we never live in a world where we only eat what The Nutritionist hands to us, and we only move our bodies in the way The Physiologist instructs us.
- vezzy-fnord 12y ago
  A writer who can analyze and restructure their story, wihout laboriously poring and cutting and pasting -> better stories. How is this related to knowing how to code?

raverbashing 12y ago

"Who wants to place bets on when country development metrics include "population % who know how to code" ... ? " Oh, an example of how CS people overestimate their importance, how funny. Dentists, doctors don't need to know how to code. Teachers don't need to know how to code. Maybe it's better that they do (some of them, still). The same with other professions. Humanity survived up to the 1980/70s without computers being widespread. Their problems were mostly solved without it. Literacy is something different, you can read a hundred year old English without many issues. It's much more universal than the code being used today. People should learn how to cook for example, before learning how to code.

kimdouglasmason 12y ago
Well said. Other things that strike me as more important than knowing how to code, which aren't common knowledge: 1. How our political system works. 2. How the economy works: specifically, what money is, where it comes from, how the banking sector works, and the relationships between money creation, interest rates, asset prices, and incomes. Most people don't understand these things, and that holds our society back far more than not knowing how to code.