I think the author has not met enough variety of people.
Yes, all schools should have a fantastic Computer Science department. And it should be more than CS, it should be "doing fun stuff with computers". However, there is a very large segment of the population who cannot program.
I've got a friend who's quite smart. She's charming and extremely capable at her job. I discovered that she has absolutely no ability to think in three dimensions. She cannot follow even a very simple series of motions. She parked her car near a post, came out, got confused, and destroyed the whole side of her car because she couldn't work out the spatial problem to get out.
I've known people who simply cannot grasp calculus. They're interesting people who offer value in the world. Calculus is a fundamental and wonderful thing to know, but that doesn't mean everyone can or should learn it.
I love programming, but I respect the variety of humanity enough to understand that it should not be mandatory.
You have no idea whether the author has "met enough variety of people." You have no idea if people are innately able to program, learn calculus, or "think in three dimensions" (btw - driving is a 2d problem). I don't. You don't. No one does. We do not have a framework for discussing the fundamental (genetic) basis of human intelligence. We do not understand even its most basic components. Some people seem to have "good memories" or be "fast at computation" but that's about all we can actually, honestly, meaningfully say. Culture is so ridiculously complicated and so powerful that it's impossible to impossible to distinguish between what is innate and what is imprinted. The fact that basically no one is able to predict the intellectual abilities of future humans is an indication of this (e.g. what would a mathematician from the 19th century say about the "fundamental" mathematical abilities of his fellow humans?).
The point of the article is that coding is in some sense a core/intrinsic skill. That anything you do is actually deeply tied to coding in the sense that "something you do" (technology, in the general sense) is equivalent to "algorithm." Weaving is coding. Playing a game is coding. Building a house is coding. Painting a picture is coding. Proving a theorem is coding (Curry-Howard Isomorphism). Sure, they're different, more intuitive, weird types of coding, but the fact that you can't see that they -are- coding implies a limitation on your ability to abstract the concept of "coding" sufficiently.
The fact is that coding is a deeply human activity, and that by understanding coding we are really understanding ourselves and the fundamental means by which we -collectively- understand reality. The fact is that we need some shared understanding of ourselves, of our logical facilities, of the basis of our ability to produce and thrive and know how to interact with the universe. Without a shared framework, communication is useless/impossible.
You have no idea whether the author has "met enough variety of people."
Which would be why I said, "I think..."
driving is a 2d problem
Uh. Okay, sure. I submit to you that it's possible I was referring to more than simply driving, and that your claim of driving being a 2d problem is just silly.
Programming is not a deeply human activity, not in the least. It involves strict, logical thinking, abstraction, and hierarchy. You disrespect the variety of humanity by claiming it to be intrinsic.
Are you sure it's not just that you or someone else is not good enough at explaining it? wink
Seriously, though, while I'm of the opinion that people learn different things at different speeds, I have yet to encounter someone who was simply unable to grasp a mathematical concept or a concept in CS (not counting some people I know with debiliating mental illnesses).
The trick is to break it into smaller and smaller chunks of logic until people get it. As long as these people are capable of basic arithmetic, I think it's possible to make them 'get it'. And yes, teaching can be very hard.
Having said all that, I do agree with ^ that programming should not be mandatory.
I have yet to encounter someone who was simply unable to grasp a mathematical concept or a concept in CS
I honestly don't know what to tell you. We can do the whole, "some people don't get it," "oh yeah, you just didn't teach it right," circular nonsense all day. I don't really care. All I can tell you is that I've been close to a number of people who would never be able to grasp programming in any meaningful way.
HN is an echo chamber of highly intelligent people, a disproportionate number of them in the Bay Area. I don't think HN participants have much of value to say about what people in general can and cannot do or understand.
Yes, all schools should have a fantastic Computer Science department. And it should be more than CS, it should be "doing fun stuff with computers". However, there is a very large segment of the population who cannot program.
I've got a friend who's quite smart. She's charming and extremely capable at her job. I discovered that she has absolutely no ability to think in three dimensions. She cannot follow even a very simple series of motions. She parked her car near a post, came out, got confused, and destroyed the whole side of her car because she couldn't work out the spatial problem to get out.
I've known people who simply cannot grasp calculus. They're interesting people who offer value in the world. Calculus is a fundamental and wonderful thing to know, but that doesn't mean everyone can or should learn it.
I love programming, but I respect the variety of humanity enough to understand that it should not be mandatory.