[codeonfire]

There is a dichotomy in tech between makers and takers. Some people try to be a maker or a few years and can't do it for a number of reasons. There is a common set of flawed thinking that causes them to decide that programming is dead. One, their world view is different because they might have more wealth and have decided that there is an infinite pool of makers to exploit. This is obviously flawed. Companies go for years without finding the right person. When they do find someone, the person they settle on is often a faker. Two, they think robots build the constituent components that go into systems. Those memory chips are made by actual people. Just because they are 300x cheaper does not mean that it is unimportant to know how they work. Three, the status quo is the end state of technology and now is the exploitation phase where we use tech instead of make tech. Fourth, they think everything is done for cash money instead of building capabilities.

This guy also seems to think programmers are so mentally deficient they are unable communicate with the 'open source community' and that this is in some way how programmers discover new technologies. He also thinks people did not contribute code in the 1990s. Where did all this software come from? Typical business view of open source. Originally b-schools actually lectured that open source was anti-business like a trade union. Now I guess they think it is sort of a crutch for too-dumb-to-breathe programmers?

There are tons of people like this guy in tech. Coded a year or two and found out the were a taker and not a maker. Still pretending to be a maker though. Their idealized programmer befits a corporation. Colors in the lines and writes "perfect code" which has no meaning other than has been annointed by CR's as to make it seem owned by the company rather than the individual. Their ideal programmer is someone who doesn't need to understand the details, works as a unit in a team, and gathers all of their knowledge by "getting help" from the company. It is absolutely blasphemy in the corporate world to suggest that anyone synthesize his or her own ideas. That's of course ridiculous but in a business setting, the takers absolutely must discount creative thought of employees 100% which literally the "product" up for grabs in tech companies. Obviously if people knew the value and how to exploit their own original ideas they wouldn't need the fucking company or takers.

As far as math and algorithms, those are more important than ever. The reason you don't see people working on those is that those people are hidden from public and private view, jealously guarded by the takers who think they control them. Natural sciences did not fucking change since the 90's. A surface to air missile or high frequency trading algorithm or advanced simulation is as costly and valuable as ever. It's the author perception of what is valuable that has changed. He's looking for code monkeys to exploit who will "get help" and write "clean code" whatever the hell that means.