I mean, do you understand the systems you work on? Down to the ISA? The transistors? The electrons?
The stack gets taller and more complex, as it ever as. People who understand one part of the stack in great depth rarely understand the entire stack. Those who understand its full shape don’t have complete depth at any one part. This is how computing has worked for a few decades at least.
You don’t have to shut up, you’re free to dive in and learn. But you’ll have to balance breadth and depth like the rest of us.
I think most people with even a bachelor's in anything STEM know it down to the transistors. That's also been true for decades. Every time I hear this line of argument I cringe. Computers aren't that deep compared to other engineering topics.
> Every time I hear this line of argument I cringe.
Because it’s the same kind of fatuous logic that intelligent design proponents use. This thing is so complex so we can’t possible understand it. Therefore, it’s magic.
People specialize for sure, but it’s not like the average person can’t figure this stuff out with some motivation.
Before you get to transistors you need to understand memory types (heap, stack, etc). You need virtualization, interrupts, and threading. You need CPU vs GPU, character encoding, and memory mapping. At least ipv4 and layers 1-3 of OSI. And much more.
Do you really think anyone with a bachelors in STEM has all that, or are you saying full stack knowledge is satisfied by knowing a high level language plus the fact that transistors switch passing or blocking current based on a signal?
The stack gets taller and more complex, as it ever as. People who understand one part of the stack in great depth rarely understand the entire stack. Those who understand its full shape don’t have complete depth at any one part. This is how computing has worked for a few decades at least.
You don’t have to shut up, you’re free to dive in and learn. But you’ll have to balance breadth and depth like the rest of us.