= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam_Bur comments on Open thread, 11-17 March 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (226)
In such case, I guess you are more likely to be correct about this than me.
Only the "cheap to learn" part feels wrong to me. I mean, the financial costs of learning programming are already literally zero in the recent years, and somehow still most people don't learn one of the highest paying professions. Why? If they didn't do it during the recent five years, why should they do it during the next twenty? Maybe an ability is the problem, not the financial costs of learning.
I suspect that those other industries either employed less people than IT, or that they were easier to learn. On the other hand, IT has its own specific risk -- a possibility to work remotely, so it is easier to outsource.
Because they can't. Go talk to someone from the lower half of the IQ distribution, see if they strike you as someone whose attempts to code will not result in a disaster.
Learning to program "Hello, world" is easy. Learning to write good (clear, concise, maintainable, elegant, effective, bug-hostile) code is pretty hard.