The Programming Talent Myth (2015) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#51

Post by denimnerd » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:52 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #22

sidlls wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you ever consider that the employee might be a smidge less likely to walk out the door if the employer invested in him or her, recognized his or her achievements in a timely manner with responsibility and authority (promotion) and compensated him or her fairly? Seems to me employees "are likely to walk out the door" mainly because employers view them as expendible expenses and not humans trading labor for somethi…

Sure, but that still doesn't make it an investment, it just makes it a less risky bet. And betting on people being high-minded over being selfish has always been a bad one.

An investment and risk go hand in hand.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#52

Post by vinceguidry » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:53 PM UTC

ionised wrote: post #38

vinceguidry wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that still doesn't make it an investment, it just makes it a less risky bet. And betting on people being high-minded over being selfish has always been a bad one.

Are you really equating company loyalty with high-mindedness here?

Well, yeah, that's what it means, right? If you pay me $50k per year and invest $20k of company resources to train me, and the second my training's up, I jump ship to a company promising to pay me $60k, wouldn't you feel ripped off?

Nobody these days would turn down a $10k raise out of company loyalty. They might for other reasons, but loyalty is absolutely not one of them anymore.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#53

Post by bluGill » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:53 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #6

itamarst wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, employers will start taking the long view and actually start investing in their employees.

That's not an investment, that's giving your money away. Would you spend $X0,000 on something that can walk out the door at any moment?

Just remember the alternative: you don't invest $X0,000 and they STAY anyway.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#54

Post by potta_coffee » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:53 PM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #15

itamarst wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Critical thinking, logic, empathy, etc. are all skills one can learn . And that's the point.

Eh, I'm not convinced of that. I don't think you can take any person and teach them to think through problems logically. It seems simple enough, and you can certainly make them _better_ at it, but I really do believe we all have upper limits on our potential.

Anyone can learn these skills, but they're sufficiently difficult that only people with the inclination and motivation to push through the hard parts make it anywhere. Desire and grit make more of a difference than talent or natural ability, which are impossible to measure.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#55

Post by vinceguidry » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:54 PM UTC

denimnerd wrote: post #51

vinceguidry wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that still doesn't make it an investment, it just makes it a less risky bet. And betting on people being high-minded over being selfish has always been a bad one.

An investment and risk go hand in hand.

Yes, but the difference between an investment and a bet involves the amount and type of risk. Investments generally don't disappear. Bets do.

Also the expected rewards are higher too. If a company bets $20k in an employee, the best they can hope for is that the employee does a good job. Not that that bet doubles in value.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#56

Post by Kluny » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:56 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #6

itamarst wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, employers will start taking the long view and actually start investing in their employees.

That's not an investment, that's giving your money away. Would you spend $X0,000 on something that can walk out the door at any moment?

Apprenticeship has been a thing as long as professions have existed. A common way to justify training an apprentice is to indenture them - they agree to work for you for a set number of years at a given wage, in exchange for training. Then you get professional organizations who negotiate on behalf of trainees/apprentices to make sure that the training wages are fair and the conditions aren't too onerous. Membership in the professional organization is contingent on keeping your indentureship agreements. Programming is such a young profession that we don't have any of that, and I think we need to evolve it.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#57

Post by mkirklions » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:56 PM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #18

EpicEng wrote: post #11

> > The truth is that programming isn't a passion or a talent, it is just a bunch of skills that can be learned. This may be true if your definition of programming is the literal act of writing code / recalling syntax, and learning new tools. Of course, that's not really what programming is. That's the easy part. Programming is about problem solving, code is simply the tool. Critical thinking/problem solving ability,…

+1 Code is simply a tool. And dev tools are even further removed. Git is not problem solving. I'm certainly not going to belittle that skill. I have Git expert envy. However, hiring a problem solver for their experience with nearly irrelevant tools is comical. A red flag, but still comical.

> However, hiring a problem solver for their experience with nearly irrelevant tools is comical

How far down the rabbithole does this go?

I have never programmed iOS, but I'm completely positive I could program for iOS.

10 years of occasional programming, from python, to school projects, to database development, to android apps, to full stack react-native development.

I'm confident that I can build an iOS app.

Programming and understanding how computers handle inputs are tools. But programming is more mindset than anything. The only benefits of knowing the specific language or framework would be skipping the 1 month of learning syntax.

I'm a recreational programmer mostly, but at some point, you realize you can do full-stack and you realize that everything is possible with google and stack overflow.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#58

Post by bluGill » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

0xdeadbeefbabe wrote: post #29

vinceguidry wrote: post #2

While on the surface of it, sure, programming is a skill and not an innate talent, it would be foolish to compare it to other career fields in that way. You can go to school to learn how to be an architect, then go and get a job as an architect and be immediately productive. You can go to school to learn how to lay bricks, then go to a job site and immediately start building something. You cannot go to school to lear…

> The state of education at the moment is so bad that unschooled yet talented individuals can be much much better at fulfilling business requirements than trained and educated professionals. I'll try that in medicine. Talented midwifes were delivering babies in the 1900s. Since midwifery is still a thing, maybe medicine is not as far advanced as you imply. Seems like talent still plays a big role in any field.

The midwives who worked with my wife are full nurses with an additional two years of med school. They are very quick to point out that their main job is to recognize the 10% of the time when there is going to be trouble and get a better trained doctor involved.

Note that you can find "midwives" with less skill than the 1900s midwife. There are a lot of quakes out there doing awful things and getting by with it because ~80% of the time you don't need any medical intervention.

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#59

Post by Daycrawler » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #11

> > The truth is that programming isn't a passion or a talent, it is just a bunch of skills that can be learned. This may be true if your definition of programming is the literal act of writing code / recalling syntax, and learning new tools. Of course, that's not really what programming is. That's the easy part. Programming is about problem solving, code is simply the tool. Critical thinking/problem solving ability,…

/r/iamverysmart

Re: The Programming Talent Myth (2015)

#60

Post by lazyasciiart » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #2

While on the surface of it, sure, programming is a skill and not an innate talent, it would be foolish to compare it to other career fields in that way. You can go to school to learn how to be an architect, then go and get a job as an architect and be immediately productive. You can go to school to learn how to lay bricks, then go to a job site and immediately start building something. You cannot go to school to lear…

> You can go to school to learn how to be an architect, then go and get a job as an architect and be immediately productive. You can go to school to learn how to lay bricks, then go to a job site and immediately start building something.

Do you actually know anyone who's worked in these fields? Because that's not true. Wanna be an architect? Go to school + get 2 years of experience + take a professional certification THEN you can be employed as an architect. Wanna lay bricks? Get a job and you'll be taught there.