

Is it unethical to have a society where only a small percentage can program computers? - amichail

Isn't this a fundamental skill just like reading/writing?
======
noodle
um, no, definitely not.

here are a few skills i would consider more fundamental than programming that
are also lacking:

    
    
      * math
      * spelling
      * logic
    

in addition, it would only be unethical if the society at hand were enforcing
some sort of limitation. anyone can learn to program (or learn
math/spelling/logic) if they want to. maybe its easier for some than others
for various reasons, but everyone _can_.

~~~
amichail
Spelling is not fundamental in an age of spelling checkers. What do you mean
by math? Being able to do basic arithmetic well is not all that important in
the computer age.

Logic of course is important and it's something that would go well with
programming skills.

~~~
noodle
good point. perhaps we should allow people to design and engineer cars that
know nothing of mechanics? or people to build space shuttles who know nothing
of aeronautics? or people to build nuclear power plans without knowledge of
nuclear physics?

i mean, all of that is just totally taken care of by computers nowadays,
amirite?

~~~
amichail
Writing skills are still considered important even though most people will not
be writing novels.

It's kind of like that here with computer programming skills.

~~~
noodle
why? with grammar checking, computers make forming correct sentences obsolete,
no?

~~~
amichail
Potentially, but grammar checkers aren't very good.

But yes, generally speaking, skills become devalued and not worth teaching
much as computers help us with them.

~~~
noodle
neither are spellcheckers or any programs that will do math/physics for you.

crutches won't help you walk if you never knew how to walk in the first place.

------
yan
What makes programming computers a fundamental skill? What will forbid me from
being a productive member of society if I don't know how to program?

~~~
amichail
You would never know what you are missing in today's society... It's kind of
like not knowing the benefits of reading & writing. That's why it is
unethical.

~~~
yan
So why isn't it unethical to not be a practicing medical doctor, dentist,
physicist, mathematician, materials engineer, parent, charity donor, pilot, or
an athlete.

If your job, hobby or passion is in set J of all possible jobs and vocations,
it doesn't make it unethical to not be J-j, where j is your job.

And programming is _nothing_ like reading and writing as you need reading and
writing to be a functional adult. You absolutely can not survive and be
affluent without reading & writing or know someone close to you who does. The
same is not even remotely true for programming.

As a matter of fact, if something requires a layman (or customer) to program,
it means that one of us who creates these programs and products, to put it
bluntly, fucked up.

~~~
amichail
_And programming is nothing like reading and writing as you need reading and
writing to be a functional adult._

...in today's society. But certainly long ago people could get by without
knowing reading & writing.

------
arockwell
I'm really confused by what you mean by unethical in the first place.

Programming is not at all a fundamental skill, and I hope that as software
gets better and better people will be able to do more with their computers
without knowing how to program our configure some stupid setting. There's
still too many simple tasks that are out of reach without some technical
knowledge.

------
inimino
Arguably, programming is as enriching a mental facility as reading and
writing, and to be without this tool due to an educational oversight is
tragic.

However, in a culture where lacking this skill is the norm (and many grew up
without even a chance at it) you'll find this argument unpopular.

------
brk
Unethical? How? I'm not aware of any limitations in society that prevent
anyone from being able to learn how to program computers?

Or are you suggesting that somehow computers should be dumbed down to the
lowest possible common denominator?

------
tsally
I think it is important to differentiate between knowing how to program and
having a fundamental understanding about how technology works. Knowing how to
program is hardly a necessity; if we have legislators, judges, and law
enforcement who cannot comprehend technology on a basic level, that is a
problem. It is not so much unethical as it is self destructive.

------
hopeless
Only a small percentage can fix cars, build bridges, prepare meat, cook fresh
food, knit/crochet/sew cloths, etc...

so no, a programming minority is not the threat to our society that you might
think

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
_A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a
hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a
wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act
alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization
is for insects._

Robert A Heinlein, _Time Enough for Love_

