Jason Bradbury: Coding lessons in schools are a waste of time
trustedreviews.com
trustedreviews.com
This sentence is grammatically correct, but I am having difficulty extracting any semantic meaning. Coding is the act of writing down one's thoughts in a way that a computer can understand. To take the human aspect out of it renders the entire concept senseless.
Coding, even if not meant for job-work, should be taught as an essential skill in the modern world. Preparing kids at young age for this skill will empower them a lot.
Really, just being able to deconstruct a large process into meaningful steps would be beneficial for many people. Coding only makes this explicit, but I worry that poor coding environments/languages/etc would hamper the core aspect. I haven't seen any of these new coding classes though, so I may be completely wrong about how it's taught.
1. I doubt that this is coming that soon
2. If it does arrive, it may well be with AI so sophisticated that the human has no role even for the "creative" parts of the process. A system that can handle non-formal requirements and implement code sounds close to general purpose AI--the kind that just replaces humanity.
This article seems pretty pointless.
It's not so much that you can take informal descriptions and turn them into software, but more that the software can be built by anyone with a few months of training, thus driving down salaries to a point where mere coding is no longer a white collar job.
That doesn't seem impossible, but the reason for its unliklihood is far more subtle.
My point was just that seeing this is a lot more subtle -- it's not a purely technical observation, but also contains a social/economic component.
Personally, I think the end of construction came after the lever and fulcrum were invented.
After humans didn't have to exert effort to build things, construction became a thing of the past...
Oh wait.
That is a crucial point that is often missed by people outside of the industry. There is nothing magical about activities that don't require the assistance of a computer today. The very principle of computability applies equally to any activity, not just mathematics.
In a way, art is the product of a very complex Turing machine that relies on physics and biology to compute it.
We are already seeing impressive pieces of art coming out of silicon computers, DeepArt being an example: https://www.facebook.com/deepart.io/.
It is, to me, extremely likely that within 20 years, we will have generated novels compete on the market with best-sellers.
The creative process will increasingly rely on mastering and combining more and more exotic techniques, and that may require a deep understanding of the new tools at hand.
> It is, to me, extremely likely that within 20 years, we will have generated novels compete on the market with best-sellers.
Where are we with that now?
I'd say it's going to be a lot sooner, given that they're already doing well in writing contests[0].
[0] http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/japanese-ai-writes-no...
Basically everything will be drag-and-drop interfaces in the future, no mention of who is going to maintain those interfaces or extend them, apparently that will be drag and drop too. I think the rice of fancy visual interfaces have so far made programming more important, and I don't see that trend decreasing in the next generation.
Out of 2 hours about 5 minutes were spend on actual coding (boot camp). One girl liked it and showed some potential. But that was passed as something "proper lady" should not do.
Definitely a gap in this market on British TV
I guess I'd just like a more 'serious' tech programme on TV.
Clueless but with influence, no wonder we are all in such poor shape.
Good luck. This sounds like people predicting flying cars and robot servants in the 50s without having any idea what they are talking about.