No, thank you! I really liked this post and I think it's something we should be looking into more considerably. I've found it very interesting that many new programmers - many of them women, at least from what I've witnessed - create
another language as one of their first projects (which is not surprising, since that'd probably be high on my list, too). While they're intended to be friendlier, they are generally under the guise of being made for children; complete with silly shapes and colors and storylines. But why just kids? Why do we feel like it isn't acceptable for adult tools to be just as fun and easy to use in their own ways? It's a lot like why we aren't doing more to utilize our collective physical exertion to answer problems in the same way computers can contribute to efforts like Folding@Home and Bitcoin mining or our eyes/knowledge for things like Snapshot Serengeti and reCAPTCHA.
What drives me in working in UX is just my own confusion and frustration with the way things are. Something does not need to be complicated to do complex things. I should not feel stupid looking at immense lines of code when I know that there are better ways to accomplish the same goal (in the same, if not shorter amount of time). Something that doesn't make sense right away probably has a problem, even though the person next to me may have the experience or luck to not have the same issue. If that disadvantage can be avoided, it should be.
Naturally, I've had a lot of ideas on how to make things better, but I can't wrap my head around building those things and I would rather find someone else equally as passionate about the issue to work with than just anyone off the street.
I think why people get so uppity by the "everyone should program/build/create/do" idea is because they are concerned about their job security. They believe that educating the masses is going to lead to oversaturation. Some are concerned because they are doers, not thinkers, and thinkers with these tools would threaten their ability to get by on the bare minimum. It's limiting them more than they think.
In reality, like any knowledge discipline, it can only create better tools, which create more/new jobs and thus create a better future.