[SolaceQuantum]

They are bonkers because how can computer science deal with "things" when it's almost entirely dealing with people's needs? How can women have on average the "reverse of emotional stability" and yet be driven from an incredibly cushy job (programming at google)?

[thu2111]

Programming involves sitting on your own most of the day talking to compilers. Hence developer's famous dislike of distractions, meetings and other social events that disrupt the flow of concentration. It's pretty much the epitome of a job that involves working with things; claiming it's not can only be the product of intense political bias. If computer science is "almost entirely dealing with people's needs" then what kind of job does count as working with things?

[geofft]

> Programming involves sitting on your own most of the day talking to compilers.

Only if you write really, really bad code. Once you're able to write code that works, the interesting question is what code to write. Professional software engineering does in fact mostly consist of talking to people. I say this based on the "intense political bias" of having been a working software engineer for many years.

I don't think there are many jobs that consist primarily of working with things. I suppose jobs that are lonely by nature, like trucker or lighthouse operator, or jobs where your work product is usually developed by one person, like sculptor or fiction writer?

[thu2111]

I've also been a software engineer for many years. If you're spending more time talking to people than coding, you aren't a programmer anymore, you're actually more of a business analyst.

[geofft]

My job title in fact is not "programmer." (And I'm not sure I've worked anywhere where that is a title.)