

Ask HN: Is learning to code really that important for future generations?  - rikacomet

This got me thinking:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKIu9yen5nc<p>Well, when I think about it, we learn Maths until high school no matter what, but a lot of those math complex concepts have no usage in our daily life, people tend to be bad in maths because of that, because they don't see an objective. From that prospective, learning to code is good, because it requires the application of those math concepts, to output simple things we can't easily do.<p>But I feel, that is not all there is to it. Thus the apparent question.
======
onion2k
What we learn at school doesn't need to be directly applicable to what we
eventually do in our careers. There only needs to be a _metaphorical_
connection. In essence, we learn how to do things that are necessary through
learning metaphors.

For example, we don't learn about history in order to know what happened in
the past. We learn about history so we can understand how actions have
consequences, how to build rational conclusions from evidence, how humanity
has (and hasn't) changed over time, and so on. History is a really good
metaphor for scientific rigour and process. We don't tend to tell kids that
because learning about how some ancient civilisation killed another is less
"boring" than formal logic.

When it comes to learning to code, being taught how to write an application so
you might be the next Mark Zuckerberg is ridiculous. The next Mark Zuckerberg
is going to learn coding regardless of what they're taught in a classroom.
But, that said, would learning the fundamentals of logic, rigour, abstraction,
and the application of some bits of maths* be useful for everyone to know?
Definitely. I strongly believe we'd have better nurses, plumbers, fighter
pilots, street cleaners, and so on in the future if children learn how to make
Tetris when they're in school now.

* There's so little actual maths in coding these days this is actually a really tenuous thing to say. I've been a developer for 15 years; for about 14 of those years I've been wrangling strings with all the maths neatly abstracted away for me. Thank goodness.

------
leoedin
I find frequently that knowing what a computer can do, and knowing how to do
it has lead to lots of interesting projects. I know I can automate things I
find boring and I know I can write embedded code to make cool electronics. I
think many people aren't even aware of what programming can offer them, and so
when they have a problem that very simple scripting could solve, they don't
recognise it.

Almost every office worker could have at one point or another benefited from
simple task automation. They just don't know it!

------
anywherenotes
Learning to code will enable future office dwellers to create macros to
automate things in word and excel. I didn't watch the video, so don't know how
deep of a skill they are pushing, but some basic knowledge of doing
if/else/while and functions is a good skill.

IMO, more people will benefit from basic programming skills, than for biology,
physics and chemistry that is taught at schools. I wouldn't suggest to take
those subjects out, but incorporating programming would be useful.

------
blockjack
More than anything, learning to code taught me how to break a daunting problem
down into manageable components. While most children learning how to make a
text adventure game in Python on a Raspberry Pi today won't be software
engineers tomorrow, I do believe that the learning process will have taught
them invaluable problem solving skills that they'll end up using every single
day, regardless of their chosen career path.

------
lifeisstillgood
Yes, absolutely. (I did a short speech about this very thing at the
<http://www.meetup.com/Find-A-tech-Job-In-London/> \- went down well. If you
are in London go to the next one !)

In my view Programming today == Literacy in 1451 (Gutenberg's printing press).
I call it code-literacy - and it has many facets - not only maths but the
expression of less precise ideas. People who are literate are exposed to
books, chapters, story arcs, narrative and argument.

Code-literate people are exposed to variables, data storage and recursive
functions. all of whcih help you design and build your business with those
capabilities.

In short, a company staffed by illiterate people and run by illiterate people
operates in a very different way to one staffed by literate. The same works
for code-literacy - companies who are code-illiterate will find themselves at
a serious competitive disadvantage. This happened in Europe for the 150 years
to 1600, and more slowly to late 19C.

I would argue that code-literacy is a force multiplier -if your relative
competitive positions are even vaguely comparable, if you are code-literate
and the opposition is not, you will crush them.

