> people who have a computer and somehow every now and then manage to interact with it to get some tiny set of tasks done
Cars can do far more than what the vast majority of drivers use it for (getting from point A to point B safely and within the law). But we don't complain that not everyone is capable of stunt driving.
Plus, you're ignoring the fact that even the best software engineer can only use a computer for a small fraction of what it's capable, since there is specialized software in every field.
A violin-maker and a violinist are two very different sets of skills, and I'd argue IT specialists are closer to the former.
I am not talking about being able to take advantage of every capability of the device in use, but capability to use the device autonomously in basic use cases. In the case of cars, it means that you are able to turn the engine on, refuel when needed, use steering wheel and engage gears. If you complain to the mechanic that the car is broken and the problem is that you have not turned the engine on you can't use a car. If you need to call IT support because ehternet cable is not connected, display is off or because the shortcut to browser in your desktop has moved, you can't use a computer.
That's fine? Our modern economy is based on specialization. I don't see a very strong argument for why every person should know how their computer really works to the point they can fix it themselves rather than paying someone else to fix it for them.
Cars can do far more than what the vast majority of drivers use it for (getting from point A to point B safely and within the law). But we don't complain that not everyone is capable of stunt driving.
Plus, you're ignoring the fact that even the best software engineer can only use a computer for a small fraction of what it's capable, since there is specialized software in every field.
A violin-maker and a violinist are two very different sets of skills, and I'd argue IT specialists are closer to the former.