| > It is neigh impossible to program a computer without some semblance of empathy, albeit for a machine and not for another human with all those complicated feelings. You have to think like a computer: to envision how it will respond to an input and what its options are for subsequent action. Solid. I've never thought of development in terms of empathy for the machine, but it's a valid and interesting perspective. Of course, one form of empathy that also gets cultivated is empathy for the programmer. It's quite easy from a non-technical perspective to gloss over the challenges that developers face when framing instructions for the inherently pedantic and narrowly logical beast that is a computer. >An analogy for this argument is that learning to program today is a bit like learning to speak Phoenician if you happened to live on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea in late antiquity. You could probably get by just fine without speaking it, since most of the Phoenician traders you would encounter most likely have a rudimentary grasp of the local language. I agree. One nitpick, on which I'm happy to be proven wrong, is that IIRC the heyday of the Phoenician traders was well before what is normally termed 'late' antiquity (2nd century AD onward). >The correlation between literacy and political agency is undeniable. We would be foolish to ignore this correlation in an age of digital literacy. Salient point. What I find these discussions typically end up revolving around is to what extent programming literacy should be encouraged. From a macro perspective, we live in a world of finite resources, and computer programming is far from the only important skill in a well functioning society. Thus, how much is enough? To piggyback on the adage that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", how little is perilous? |
I like your point about "how little knowledge is a perilous thing?" Completely agree that programming is far from the only important skill. I just generally think that demystifying what is popularly considered to be "esoteric" knowledge is almost always good for a healthy society. The less we know about how the mysterious machines work, the more we fear them and the more trust and power we give to the people who can manipulate them. I think this is hogwash and completely unnecessary since a computer is really just a super-fast filing clerk [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA].