Forget 6-Minute Abs: Learn To Code In a Day

whyloginwhysubscribe writes "The usually excellent BBC 'Click' programme has an article on 'Why computer code is the new language to learn' — which features a company in London who offer courses on learning to code in a day. The BBC clip has an interesting interview with a marketing director who, it seems to me, is going to go back and tell his programmers to speed up because otherwise he could do it himself! Decoded.co's testimonials page is particularly funny: 'I really feel like I could talk credibly to a coder, given we can now actually speak the same language.'"

Comments

language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

Writing code has little to do with "grammar" and more to do with logic. I wonder, how do you teach that in a day?

Re:language != logic

[Joce640k]

Maybe they teach LOGO. That can be learned in a day...

Re:language != logic

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Studiously refraining from teaching somebody any of that boosts their confidence in a way that only years, or even decades, of advanced study can hope to equal!

Incidentally, why doing you programmers just prove that your algorithms will never hang before shipping code? Are you lazy or something?

Re:language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

They teach HTML, CSS and Javascript. Only need an hour and definitely no logic.

Re:language != logic

[Culture20]

Incidentally, why doing you programmers just prove that your algorithms will never hang before shipping code? Are you lazy or something?

Few programmers are computer scientists, just as few slashdot users being grammarians.

Re:language != logic

[Quiet_Desperation]

just as few slashdot users being grammarians.

I fail to see how religion enters into this.

Re:language != logic

[Baloroth]

I fail to see how religion enters into this.

Emacs vs vi.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

It's a course in HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Javascript is the only one of the three that is an actual programming language, they aren't teaching people how to program. They're teaching people how those three languages interact to create a web page. It actually seems like a pretty useful course for developers who work in any company that produces online products to send their marketing and sales teams to, so that those teams can at least get a glimpse about how these things work just so that they have a better understanding of what they're asking us to do. Or, so that they have more of an idea of what's possible. The #1 question I'm asked is "is it possible to..." Yes, it's possible, it's always possible, it's a question of time and money. I don't know how many times I have to answer that question before people realize they can just skip straight to the second question ("what does it take to do it"). A class like this may clue them in.

Re:language != logic

[NFN_NLN]

Writing code has little to do with "grammar" and more to do with logic. I wonder, how do you teach that in a day?

Pffft... "learning to code in a day"? During their lunch break they can take my new course: "learn how to become a marketing director in 10 easy minutes".

That guy sounds like dead weight. Maybe he should get his ass down there and start coding. He can start by fixing spelling errors in strings bundle :).

Re:language != logic

[kallisti]

I think that's a mis-reference to the Halting Problem if so. It's not (always) hard to prove that a given algorithm will terminate. It's just not possible to do it generically, and that doesn't sound like what he was suggesting.

I think that's a misunderstanding of the Joking Problem. It's not (always) hard to prove that a given post was intended for humorous effect and thus could get away with not being exactly correct.

It often runs into the Pedant Problem, which is sort of the geek version of code refusing to run if it contains the slightest error.

Re:language != logic

[frank_adrian314159]

Yes, it's possible, it's always possible, it's a question of time and money.

Obviously, you've never had a marketing person ask for something that is so out of the ballpark that it would be an equivalent of solving "strong AI" problems (where you can't give an estimate) - it's not always "possible". The answer to which must be, "We can't do that, but we could do this," where "this" is at least a tractable problem and puts you back in the realm of your question #1.

Re:language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

"Incidentally, why doing you programmers just prove that your algorithms will never hang before shipping code? Are you lazy or something?"

Not sure if troll or not. If you are troll, color me an fool for biting.

As someone with formal comp sci training, and onward into graduate degree... let me give you a crude hint. Others can cite specifics if they want. But this is the answer:

In general, the problem you propose -- if solved, would immediately result in a million dollar reward for solving a millenium problem.

You could safely turn down this reward -- because you would have to publish your proof in an academic journal.

You'd probably also immediately get a fields medal and nobel prize.

A greedy person would take the process/result and encrypt it-- guarded very heavily as a trade secret. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'd try to hire mercs immediately and up front, and go into hiding. You would be able to use this to break virtually all modern encryption algorithms, most random number generators, and create the best compression system theoretically possible. Ever. In the known universe.

This problem is called solving L-Halt (halting problem). And if such a technique existed, and could be done in "reasonable" time -- such that it collapsed NP hard into NP into P ... it would be a breakthrough that truly redefines the meaning of "epic". The reasonable implications are truly earth shattering.

There *is* an algorithm to do it (not in reasoanble time or space). Sort of. The process actually grows faster than any computable number. I don't believe the answer is known (deterministically and in general) for any program with more than five instructions.

It's been an open problem since the 20's, and a decent group of scientists believe a proof of existence or non-existence is impossible. An even larger (possibly majority? Other experts can chip in) group believe if a proof is found, it will be that no such polynomial time algorithm can exist.

So... let's put it this way:

For specific pieces of code, such proofs may be done. I'm not an expert in it, but I've studied it very lightly. It's very nearly impossible for all but the most trivial softwares -- specifically, for anything but certain numeric algorithms. And if it isn't impossible... it takes a huge amount of time by hand. There's automated provers, but they are... basically infants.

The notion of "proof of correctness" is a formalism that would make modern software development practices very nearly impossible. And if it could be done, the costs would be so prohibitive that even hardware design would likely be cheaper -- because even chips don't have the same level of rigor in their analysis.

Are we lazy? Well frankly yes, a lot of us are lazy. But the proof you ask for... it's the holy grail of computer science.

And a real computer scientist would know that immediately. A real programmer -- they might dream of it.

Re:language != logic

[ewanm89]

I was thinking about factorizing the product of two large primes. There are numerous problems in computer science that we can't do with current technology;

Re:language != logic

[Nadaka]

The answer to that question is: Lets find out.

Re:language != logic

[turbidostato]

"I was thinking about factorizing the product of two large primes. There are numerous problems in computer science that we can't do with current technology;"

Excellent point... Against your position. Factorizing large primes it's not only possible but trivial. It's only that it's general case horribly time consuming (thus, expensive). Hence the "don't ask me if it's possible and go directly to the second question".

Re:language != logic

[dkleinsc]

No problem: 50% up front.

Hey, if you've done 6 impossible things before breakfast ...

Re:language != logic

[Nadaka]

Why don't I?

Because I am not allowed to.

Time spent forming proofs is not something clients want to actually pay for.

So if I am caught "wasting time on silly maths", I could get in trouble.

Re:language != logic

[turbidostato]

Wooosh!

Re:language != logic

[jxander]

Likewise, basic working knowledge != skill

I could teach someone to fire a pistol or rifle in a day. Heck, I could teach you both in a day.

Doesn't make you an expert marksman or skilled assassin. Just means you know where to stick the bullets, and which part you squeeze for the boom. I'd imagine a 1-day code class isn't much more comprehensive than that.

Re:language != logic

[Sir_Sri]

The hope is that they already have logic, and need the grammar, and not even very much of it, just enough to understand the difference between a logical concept and the programmer parlance of a particular method of implementing said logical concept.

In the same way that the first couple of weeks on the job as a programmer you hear a lot of MBA waffle, and have to figure out what it means and whether or not the upcoming quarterly report, retention bonuses or data-driven decisions matter to you.

For non programmers the barrier to entry is simply too high when dealing with on staff programmers. Trying to explain the difference between CSS and javascript to someone in marketing is about as painful as grandma tech support, so we don't generally do it, or if we do, we do it badly, leaving the guy in marketing with no fucking clue.

Unfortunately, this part of nerd culture bites us back in the arse, because we need to learn mind reading (we used to call a portion of a course we taught to cs grads 'mind reading' for this reason) to figure out what the requirements given to us are. The people asking us to do things don't really understand how we make it happen, so their requirements are bad, we are generally incapable of teaching them, so the requirements continue to be bad, and we make crappy products.

If someone thinks they've found staff who can talk to non programmers enough to get them to the point that programmers can catch them up more power to them. They're probably wrong, but this is a problem that needs to be solved.

You're right of course, that actual programming is a problem in logic, and some people simply aren't capable of thinking logically, but they're a lost cause anyway.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

You are most certainly at least as clueless about what THEY do as you think they are about what YOU do.

While this may be true, I also don't go around asking them if it's possible to write a proposal or if it's possible to create a sales presentation or marketing plan. I know what's possible in their jobs, but they see our application that has been built over 4 years with up to 100,000 lines of code, where a programmer built each feature, and they still ask me if it's even possible to change a feature to work a different way. That means they don't understand my job at all. I built the feature from scratch to start with so, yeah, it's possible to change it. It's not just a choice of phrase either, sometimes someone will walk all the way across the office to find me (even though I've got a phone sitting right here), ask me if a certain thing is possible, and walk away.

Although really the worst thing is when I see people quoting a new feature to a customer which already exists in the application. So not only do they not know what is possible, but they also don't know what the application already does. This class wouldn't fix that.

Re:language != logic

[Peristaltic]

Thank you, Sheldon.

Re:language != logic

[shia84]

I've had requests where it wasn't possible to add some feature with the current application architecture. You may call it bad design (it wasn't me ^^), and the stupid version of "is it possible?" happens more often, but sometimes you just have to answer with a no.
If you want to argue that it is possible to write a new application from scratch that supports this particular feature, then yes, it's just a matter of time and money, but this is just theoretical and usually not what people mean by requesting a feature addition to a tool they use.

Re:language != logic

[davidwr]

The #1 question I'm asked is "is it possible to..." Yes, it's possible, it's always possible, it's a question of time and money.

Sometimes, it really isn't possible, at least not within the laws of physics as we know it or, for logic and math, within the set of logical or mathematical axioms we have agreed to solve the problem in.

Canonical yet trivial example:

Using normal rules of logic, prove TRUE EQUALS FALSE.

Well, you can't, at least not without changing the rules of logic.

Within the realms of physics:

Get me from London to Washington in 0.001 seconds or less alive and safe without the use of faster-than-light travel, time travel, wormholes, or similar devices.

Within the realms of politics:

Get the currently-elected United States Congress to agree on something besides honoring heroes. *joke, I think*

Re:language != logic

[hackertourist]

Writing code has little to do with "grammar"

Incorrect. Grammar (syntax by any other name) is what keeps tripping me up when I get started on one of my occasional forays into programming. I just don't do it enough to get fluent, so I keep mixing up my $ and @ and {} (actual examples from a recent XSLFO project).

Re:language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had marketing ask me to write a program that selects one of several choices based on a user's needs with no mechanism for the user to enter those needs as input.

I'd love to hear how that's possible.

Re:language != logic

[harperska]

In the company that I work for, people are just starting to get to the point of asking the "is it possible" question. The previous IT regime (all of whom were fired for gross incompetence a year or two before I was hired) learned to beat down any and all feature requests on the software they were employed to write and maintain by declaring that it was literally (and I do mean literally) impossible to do even the most trivial things such as reordering the columns on a table of data, so as to avoid having to do any real work. The poor computer illiterate staff didn't know any better, and so learned to just stop asking.

Re:language != logic

[the_B0fh]

You haven't taken the ESP class yet?

Re:language != logic

[ceoyoyo]

It's extremely difficult to prove correctness in anything but very short programs. It's done for some critical embedded code, but is totally impractical for anything you're likely to run on a PC. Not to mention that the average programmer doesn't know how.

Now, preventing a program from hanging is pretty easy in most modern languages. Just put the whole program in an exception block. But that's probably not exactly what you want, is it?

Re:language != logic

[Kelbear]

Marketing's reply: Through the use of social disruptive crowd-sourced adaptive technology that curates and refines user-generated data like never before. Obviously.

Re:language != logic

[turbidostato]

"I'd love to hear how that's possible."

You just go to the user's home and ask it in person.

Done.

Again, it's not about if it is possible, but if it *sensibly possible* (given budget/time constrains).

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

I don't get requests to solve classic computer science problems, all of my requests are concerning feature additions or changes to our application. Our customers don't care about proving if a problem is NP-complete (or even something fun like shortest-path). They want to add new columns to a report or implement single sign-on or an automatic FTP transfer or something.

Re:language != logic

[Beardydog]

I think they agreed to commend efforts to promote and enhance public safety and consumer awareness on the proper bonding of yellow corrugated stainless steel tubing.

I mean, it's not like they're just dicking around over there.

Re:language != logic

[element-o.p.]

Excellent point... Against your position.

Not quite. ewanm89 made an assumption in his statement -- namely, that it's possible to do so within a reasonable timeframe and for arbitrarily large prime numbers -- which is certainly poor form. However, if you reword his post to include that assumption, then he is correct. With current, widely available technology, no, it is not possible to factorize the product of two arbitrarily large prime numbers in a reasonable* timeframe when you don't know what either of those prime numbers are. Since it is possible to reword his statement to make it correct, then his point is valid, even if his example was flawed.

* Yes, "reasonable" is a wiggle-word, and might be anywhere from under 1 second to 1,000 years, depending upon the problem you are trying to solve. Let's just define "reasonable" as "within the scope of a human's attention span while web browsing" -- say under a minute -- for purposes of this discussion.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

Nice. There was a programmer here who was in way over his head and eventually starting referring to bugs as "anomalies" that he wasn't going to be able to fix (or even find the cause, for that matter). The military clients loved hearing that explanation. I was scared to try to fix his code, if I saw a misspelled variable name then fixing that misspelling may break the program further. I saw one small section of his code where he used a word as part of a variable name, I think it was "assessment", and he spelled it three different ways for three variables, none of which were actually correct. It was a wonder his code ran at all. That project currently resides in the "pending a complete rewrite" section of purgatory.

Re:language != logic

[jc42]

Yes, it's possible, it's always possible, it's a question of time and money.

Obviously, you've never had a marketing person ask for something that is so out of the ballpark that it would be an equivalent of solving "strong AI" problems ...

Heh. A team I was once on was asked to do a task that provably required an upgrade to the speed of light. It involved the time for getting messages between widely separated places on the planet. The managers couldn't accept that the universe imposes a speed limit on such things. It was clear that they understood this to mean that we weren't smart enough to solve the problem. We on the development team quickly updated our resumes ...

Re:language != logic

[Obfuscant]

Get me from London to Washington in 0.001 seconds or less alive and safe without the use of faster-than-light travel, time travel, wormholes, or similar devices.

Uhhh, if you get an unknown URL in your email, don't click on it. Some guys here asked me if I could code a web page to get someone named 'davidwr' from London to Washington in 0.001 seconds and I said I could do it, but he wouldn't be alive when he got there. They said that was ok, so ...

Re:language != logic

[hazem]

I get impossible requests like this:

We want system A to get data from system B and do the same calculations so a report from A matches B 100%. We also want to be able to change the data in system A after it comes from B... but the reports still need to match 100%.

This isn't even in the realm of NP-complete... it's just plain impossible.

Re:language != logic

[DJRumpy]

No, they teach the fundamentals of HTML, CSS and Javascript, not the entire language (or markup as the case may be). Unless someone has perfect recall, and a thorough understanding of coding structures, there is no way you could possibly teach them to code well in an hour.

You CAN teach someone basic coding fundamentals, some basic structures, and where the index is on their 'coding for dummies' book, but hoping for some to spit out a complex, complete program after an hour of teaching is not realistic in any sense of the word.

"Hello World" yes. Beyond that? Not so much...

Re:language != logic

[OhSoLaMeow]

BINGO!

That's covered in the afternoon lecture.

Re:language != logic

[Eponymous Hero]

some things are impossible. i once got a request to make a popup or a modal confirm box interrupt the user from closing the browser window. they wanted an "are you sure you want to leave the site?" button. i very nicely explained what a fucking retarded idea that was, offered a better solution, and they went with it.

i think it's a bad idea to allow marketers and account execs come to you, the developer, asking questions like, "is this possible?" because that shows that they've already decided on a solution for you. instead, they should talk to the client or project owner and get a clear idea of what the desired result should be (not how to do it). you then come back with solutions rooted in best practices that play well with the rest of your code. too often you'll have an even better idea than theirs (maybe one that doesn't completely fuck up everything else, or at least makes logical sense), but it's too late -- ego is at stake or promises were made.

if the account exec had stopped to listen to their dumb idea, talked them through the ultimate desired result, and then come to me, there would have been a lot less back and forth. most requests i shoot down are of the "not worth the time it would take" variety, but sometimes it's more like "think about that for a while and come back to me when you realize how stupid/pointless it is." clients could save themselves a lot of money in logistics if they would stop trying to do the engineer's job for them.

logic and critical thinking are still valuable tools when you're not a developer. if you can teach that in a day, then i'll celebrate.

Re:language != logic

[gnasher719]

We want system A to get data from system B and do the same calculations so a report from A matches B 100%. We also want to be able to change the data in system A after it comes from B... but the reports still need to match 100%.

Not impossible, actually easy. You import both the data and the report from B into A. Then they can change the data any way they like, you always use the report from B.

Re:language != logic

[turbidostato]

"ewanm89 made an assumption in his statement "

Yes. And it was the wrong assumption, because all this came from a guy talking about the bussiness side coming to him asking if something was possible (first question) and then, after that, "...within these and these constrains" (second question) and begging they going directly to the second question.

And given the assumpion, he could -and should, choose a problem that wasn't obviously trivial but costly, because *that* was exactly the point of the guy he tried to counter argue.

"Yes, "reasonable" is a wiggle-word, and might be anywhere from under 1 second to 1,000 years, depending upon the problem you are trying to solve."

Exactly: "reasonable", even for exactly the same problem is not the same for an advertising company wanting to harvest users' data than for the NSA trying to decipher and Al-Qaeda message. So, again, the important part is not if "it is possible" but "whiting *this* framework" and you can't always know -if not told so, what the (bussiness) constrains exactly are.

Re:language != logic

[Darinbob]

Not so sure. I've worked with many professionals whom I am convinced learn how to code in less than a day.

Re:language != logic

[hazem]

Oh no. I wish it were that easy. However they want the changes they make in A to show up in their reports. But they want the reports to match B 100%. But B is the "system of record" and cannot be refreshed from A. They're conflicting and mutually exclusive requirements... and they don't seem to understand that.

I have this history in the organization of doing difficult and amazing things. I joke about the whole, "the difficult I'll do right now, the impossible will take a little while", but I think they take it seriously. I just wish they paid me like I was able to do the impossible.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

You should print out and hang up my favorite Charles Babbage quote:

"On two occasions I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."

Re:language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

While I've had that same conversation many times, you also need to realize that "they" aren't asking questions the same way you would. They may say is it possible, but what they are really asking is given your knowledge as to the rough order of magnitude of the project/budget, is it practical to contemplate. Anytime you're dealing with non-technical people, you have to listen for what they mean, not what they say.

Re:language != logic

[s73v3r]

It's entirely possible that the application they were maintaining was just so shittily written that it would be a major undertaking to do that.

Although this would also fall under the "gross incompetence" moniker.

Re:language != logic

[scribblej]

Factoring large primes, or any primes, is not only trivial, but fast. Super fast. You meant the products of large primes, I'm sure.

Re:language != logic

[Zaelath]

You could have solved it by using quantum entanglement as your network layer, but nooooooooo :)

Re:language != logic

[youngatheart]

Talk about a challenge. I love these requests because you can pretty much talk about what it would take to develop solutions that are beyond current technology. (Some extravagant requests are doable with just an insane rather than the impossible budget this one will take.)

the time for getting messages between widely separated places on the planet.

You need to do it faster than 299,792,458 m/s? Okay, but we'll have to invest in some serious R&D. In 1998 Morris, Thorne and Yurtsever worked out a possible solution, but to have a good chance of solving it in our lifetime as a practical application will require a budget in the quadrillion range or at least a team of research engineers who are going to cost our company trillions to finance. Now's a good time too, because we can pick up the SSC as an exploratory tool at a discount. Can you get me that budget to work with, because I'd love to manage the project!

Re:language != logic

[youngatheart]

Budget! I can do it cheap too. It'll only cost about 40 million, 1 million for research and development to make a very realistic looking stargate, another 1 million to get the right magician involved and pay for his silence, a few thousand for a pig, a grinder and high powered pneumatic cannon, a couple million to ensure that 'davidwr' can be depended on to stay gone after the demo and the remainder to pay for my plastic surgery, new identity and personal lifetime vacation.

Re:language != logic

[phantomfive]

Always give a response to these types of query. If they decide to ask you to build it, you'll get a bigger budget. Go play golf. If they ask what you're doing, say, "designing." If they don't understand, point them to Joel on software. Eventually they'll catch on but your golf score will be low enough you can play professionally. Tiger, here I come!

Re:language != logic

[youngatheart]

That code reminds me of... well mine. Sorry about that. Odds are it isn't actually mine, but there have been a few coding sessions where I was a little heavy on the Merlot and %s/originalvariable/whatimeannow/g. Once it runs and looks like the output is good, you sleep. When you revisit your code, generally much later, to fix something minor, you discover that the worst coder in the world has apparently been going through your elegant programs with a randomizer and a blindfold. Touch one thing and suddenly you're cursing that freak with a passion.

I've got one such project going right now and I think I'm in the third or fourth rewrite attempt since I gave up on fixing past-me's functional but fragile apparent attempt to win an obfuscated coding contest. I mean it looks like it makes sense but I keep running into these functions that don't look like they should be where they are and I have a fuzzy memory of putting them there and why, but when I try to do things the right way I get locked out of my firewall, kill my VPN or crash browsers. (Yes, you guessed it, manipulating iptables dynamically and I am indeed over my head sometimes.) Thankfully it is in what I'd call pre-pre-release state. If I had to maintain this stuff for a client right now, I'd be having a very bad week.

Re:language != logic

[ewanm89]

Actually, there is this little thing called schors algorithm which does do it in polynomial time, therefore I know its theoretically possible to do in reasonable time. Unfortunately it requires a trinary state machine to run and such machines have a habit of pulling themselves apart with more than a few bits of data and tend to need to be recreated after each run currently.

Re:language != logic

[epyT-R]

because then your office suite would cost $100,000 instead of $200-500 (or free).

Re:language != logic

[Mitchell314]

With tags, what more do you need to know?

Re:language != logic

[ILongForDarkness]

Come on a if statement a for loop and a switch statement and there is nothing stopping you from starting the next Google. Deep technical knowledge, the ability to assemble components into large/complex/maintainable systems, research user needs and manage project budget and people all things that are useless details.

Re:language != logic

[ILongForDarkness]

Turing that was a fun language. Syntax isn't going to teach you how to figure out a linked list or the like, let alone a crypto algorithm.

Re:language != logic

[Anonymous Coward]

<marquee>?

Re:language != logic

[drdaz]

It's extremely difficult to prove correctness in anything but very short programs. It's done for some critical embedded code, but is totally impractical for anything you're likely to run on a PC. Not to mention that the average programmer doesn't know how.

Now, preventing a program from hanging is pretty easy in most modern languages. Just put the whole program in an exception block. But that's probably not exactly what you want, is it?

It wouldn't work anyway. An exception is absolutely not equivalent to a hang (non-termination). Look:

try{
          while(true){
                    {
                          sleep(1);
                    }
} catch(Exception e){
            System.out.println("this line will never print");
}

Re:language != logic

[jeremyp]

Of course that's impossible. They want to change the report but keep it the same. You just need to frame the request in such a way that they understand they have asked for a logical impossibility.

Re:language != logic

[jeremyp]

That's totally possible as long as you also have the wrong algorithm.

Re:language != logic

[TeknoHog]

You could have solved it by using quantum entanglement as your network layer, but nooooooooo :)

No, because quantum teleportation still requires a classical information channel, if you want to transfer anything meaningful.

Re:language != logic

[bLanark]

However grammar is an indication of performance (not the only one) - see I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar. Here's Why. for a view on this. (Unfortunate URL truncation there).

Re:language != logic

[ceoyoyo]

Write your entire program as subprocesses spawned by a controller with a watchdog timer. If any subprocess takes too long to execute it gets killed.

Or, if you don't want to do that, put a watchdog timer that throws an exception in every loop you write.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

If you having the wrong algorithm then you're misunderstanding what the machine does, which is a completely different issue.

Re:language != logic

[amicusNYCL]

Looks like I evoked my inner Indian there. Hoping you are having the nice day.

Re:language != logic

[jep305]

You forgot to throw the word "cloud" in there.

Re:language != logic

[Em Adespoton]

Yes, but if the issue is that actions need to be taken before the information can hope to arrive, then quantum entanglement could be the answer.

Step 1: have a playbook of courses of action (the classical information channel -- the information has already been sent, we just don't know which bit is wanted)
Step 2: set up a quantum 8-ball that tells which bit of information to select
Steps 3 and 5: take action based on the 8-ball
Step 4: send the result of step 3 to the person performing step 5.

This should work, shouldn't it?

It wouldn't work for simultaneous transmission of unknown information, but it would work for taking simultaneous action based on information already shared. If the issue is synchronicity, problem solved. If the issue is to minimize the time between receipt of information and time of action based on that information globally, without releasing the information earlier to one point than another, well, problem still a problem. You could even use quantum encryption on the sent data and have the action be the decryption of said data, so everyone essentially receives the "information" at the same time, even though the receipt of the underlying data will be staggered.

Good luck getting this to work for a regular business software development team though....

Re:language != logic

[Dabido]

They learn binary, only two things to remember, '0' and '1'. But it does take all day to teach a boss both. :-)

Re:language != logic

[MadKeithV]

I did once, but its value wasn't saved properly across calls.

Re:language != logic

[doccus]

I just checked.. I's because it's a "one day" course, where they teach the basics of coding.. whatever you manages to take away after the day is over, is what you have been able to "learn" in a day ;-)

Re:language != logic

[doccus]

Besides, it *must* be a good course.. Ater the day spent, apparently one of it's enthusiastic supporters can now "Operate the Bombe".. (!)

Re:language != logic

[jc42]

Huh? I've known any number of people who've memorized the magic number 299,792,458. How hard is that? It's nothing compared to the nutcases who memorize pi to thousands of places. ;-)

Myself, I only memorized pi to 20 places (or 21, counting the initial 3), then decided I had more interesting ways to waste chunks of my life. But a 9-digit number is less than half that. Anyone with half a brain should be able to memorize it in under a day. And it is one of the most important numbers in our universe, after all. Well, except for the fact that it's essentially a nonsense number, since it's based on the meter, and that's a totally arbitrary distance.

(Actually, I have used pi to over 10 places, though I don't think I've ever needed it to 20 places.)

A little knowledge...

[CadentOrange]

... is a dangerous thing! I can just see bosses putting more pressure on coders to "get the job done now!" and then failing to understand why code takes so long to be delivered.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, just tell the boss that the dwim feature of your compiler is broken, and you must work around it.

Re:A little knowledge...

[knuthin]

If coding can be learned in a day, why do we have people who suck so badly at it?

And if it can be learned in a day, most of the companies are ready to pay 100,000$ per year or more to guys who do it, and involves B16B00B5, I don't know what's stopping the rest of the world from getting rich.

Re:A little knowledge...

[iamgnat]

If coding can be learned in a day, why do we have people who suck so badly at it?

Because they learned it in a day?

Re:A little knowledge...

[Kenja]

Fast, cheap, good. Pick any two.

Problem is many managers pick fast & cheap and then complain when its not good.

Re:A little knowledge...

[cpu6502]

Yes Mr. Boss I could code an entire program in just one day.
It just won't work.
THAT'S the hard part Testing the product & making it work bugfree. Even you know that testing takes a long, long time.

>>>B16B00B5

Some of us prefer 5/^\A11B00B5 thank you very much. Like two scoops of vanilla.

Re:A little knowledge...

[TheCarp]

Meh I could teach you to write basic code in a day. The difference is, nobody hires people because "they know how to write code". Its about being experienced and knwoledgeable.

I could teach you to drive a car in a day too.... but, being able to drive a car and being an expert, experienced driver are two very very different things. There is a huge difference between "I can step on the gas and make it go, and bring it to a stop" and "I have been in several skids, and am adept at steering out of them" (or rather into them, if you want to split that hair).

I think they are doing a real disservice to their students if they are really leaving them with the impression that they are going to be competent or even "speak the same language" as someone who has been doing it for years.

That said, I might believe in either the ability to teach some basic coding in a day or the ability to gain exposure to some concepts and learn to communicate better with coders in a day... but... to become a competent coder? That I would need to see to believe.

Re:A little knowledge...

[cpu6502]

Do good & cheap go together? If it's slow to develop, it wouldn't be cheap because of all the extra labor hours.

Re:A little knowledge...

[El_Muerte_TDS]

Meh I could teach you to write basic code in a day. The difference is, nobody hires people because "they know how to write code".

Yes they do, a lot., because those people are much cheaper.

Re:A little knowledge...

[ynp7]

Sure. Just do it yourself on the evenings and weekends without paying yourself a salary. It'll be extra slow if "you" are a manager without any experience developing anything.

Re:A little knowledge...

[cowboy76Spain]

On the other hand, know-it-all users are fun to talk to.

Just today I had a chat with someone who complained that he could not use our IE centric webmail with his private iPad. It was funny seeing his gears running about how to make me confess the secret trick to make his iPad work with our system (including the usual reference to another organization vaguely related to us where "they can do it").

Of course, the time lost with those wankers. Luckily today was a slow day.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Teun]

Who is the wanker when in 2012 your webmail is IE centric?

Re:A little knowledge...

[cowboy76Spain]

The one who thinks that, just because it is 2012, all our IT will automagically upgrade itself without the required investments, and that we will leave all our legacy systems because they are "not cool"

Oh, and the one that the issue will be resolved by arguing with me instead of arguing with the boss of the boss of the boss .... of my boss.

Re:A little knowledge...

[harperska]

I think they are doing a real disservice to their students if they are really leaving them with the impression that they are going to be competent or even "speak the same language" as someone who has been doing it for years.

I took German classes in high school. I still remember some of it. Therefore, I speak the same language as somebody born and raised in Dusseldorf. I have no illusions that I am anywhere near fluent, and would have no idea what that Dusseldorfer was saying half the time. But technically we are both speaking the same language - German. It is just a matter of degree.

I think that it can be valuable for non IT people in a company that depends on IT (and what company doesn't these days?) to speak at least as much IT lingo as I speak German. There have been times where we are trying to explain why one person's request will take a day to complete, while another request may take a month. But no matter how much we dumb it down, their eyes still gloss over when we attempt to explain.

Re:A little knowledge...

[TheCarp]

There have been times where we are trying to explain why one person's request will take a day to complete, while another request may take a month. But no matter how much we dumb it down, their eyes still gloss over when we attempt to explain.

reminds me of a project that went down in flames once.

I was out of work, a buddy of mine had another guy with a bit more experience than me writting web apps (I am more sysadmin with some coding skills). He had a client lined up, we had gotten through defining some requirements, but my buddy, the less technical more "sales" type, was having so much trouble understanding the complexity.

We told him, this is a multi-week project, its going to require research, coding, integration etc. We told him he shouldn't be willing to accept anything under 10k, and it really thats on the low side for what they wanted.... should be more for what we are looking at.

At our next meeting he told us he agreed to do it for 1k, and he knew we could "bang it out in a weekend".

We both walked away and left him holding the bag he just made for himself.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Eponymous Hero]

no, cpu time falls under quality. fast refers to how soon they can get a finished product.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Eponymous Hero]

just curious. what is it that makes it IE centric?

Re:A little knowledge...

[cowboy76Spain]

Lotus Notes. As fair as I have tested, it might run on Mozilla but works better in IE.

In fact, for new software in general, Mozilla compatibility is desirable, but the official platform is Windows + IE and all software must support it, and it is the platform that will be supported by the IT staff.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Ryanrule]

Pick one....

Re:A little knowledge...

[formfeed]

It is customary to reply with an xkcd link.
But today it might be dilbert that sums it up the best.

Re:A little knowledge...

[Alex Belits]

coding

That's "development", dammit!

Re:A little knowledge...

[IICV]

If coding can be learned in a day, why do we have people who suck so badly at it?

If it can be learned in a day, why do universities offer four year degrees in it?

What could possibly go wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Marketing in our company always says to us developers: 'Look, we already have all the new features, we are quicker than you.'.

They tell us it's a joke, but in the end, they believe it's true....

Sure you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Just depends on the scope of what you are learning to code. Just like anything else, you can learn to weld in a day, you can learn to golf in a day, etc etc. But I don't know of any pro welders or golfers that got there after one day of learning. That one day may have opened them up to something that set them on their career patch, of course, but it wasn't enough in and of itself.

This is a complete non story.

More accurate title for the training

[bjdevil66]

Learn how to really piss off real developers in a day.

Re:More accurate title for the training

[schitso]

Where are my mod points when I need them? +1

Re:More accurate title for the training

[RabidBear]

This comment pretty much summed up my my feeling towards the entire course. One day ago I couldn't say programmer now I are one. As a professional developer for nearly two decades I have never been a "fan" of the "Learn X in 10 minutes" or "Programming X for Dummies" series. Just because these courses can teach HelloWorld in ten minutes does not make you a developer. +1 Mod Point

Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Their website displays the testimonial of the co-founder. How in the world is that credible?

Re:Seriously?

[coinreturn]

And four of the testimonials use the non-standard "learnt" instead of learned. Now, I admit I don't know how often learnt is used in the UK (my spellchecker doesn't like it), but you rarely hear or see it here in the USA.

Re:Seriously?

[clickclickdrone]

Their website displays the testimonial of the co-founder. How in the world is that credible?

There's quite a few names that look suspect. I can't believe there's someone called Kitcatt for starters.

Re:Seriously?

[Eponymous Hero]

"It has opened up my understanding of the digital world. What was once a mystery now seems so clear. Like that bit in the matrix where he takes the blue pill.

Craig Mawdsley
Head of Planning, AMV BBDO

yeah, clear, like the blue pill. sounds about right. the red pill was the one that revealed the matrix.

Easy chords for musicians

[istartedi]

Yeah, just like easy chords. And then after a day of that, you step out your door and any random guy who's been playing guitar for a few years blows you away. Next!

"Hello World!!!"

[stevegee58]

Yay! I'm a coder now!

Re:"Hello World!!!"

[Mashiki]

Yeah but can you make it print backwards in Fortran and Cobol? The punch cards are waiting mister!

Is just like cooking

[gmuslera]

but in just a day you will only learn to cook (or code) spaguetti.

Re:Is just like cooking

[0racle]

Next up, learn written English in a day.

/spaghetti
//Yes, I had to look up the correct spelling

Re:Is just like cooking

[CanHasDIY]

Next up, learn written English in a day. /spaghetti //Yes, I had to look up the correct spelling

Uh, isn't spaghetti an Italian word?

Onion article

[PFactor]

At first glance I thought, "Hee, the Onion is funny". After reading TFA I thought, "Sheesh, I wish this was an Onion story".

Re:Onion article

[Rei]

Sometimes, you wish things in life were. For example, the "I spent a couple hours reading blog posts from a TV weatherman in California, and now I'm an expert on climate science!" crowd.

Re:Onion article

[TheRaven64]

The summary started with:

The usually excellent BBC 'Click' programme

From this we can conclude that it was written by someone who either:

• Is an employee of the BBC
• Has never actually watched Click
• Completely lacks any understanding of computers
• Thinks 'excellent' is a synonym for 'cringeworthy and dumbed down to the point of inaccuracy'

After that, it's safe to ignore the rest of TFS and skip TFA entirely.

Re:Onion article

[whyloginwhysubscribe]

haha - I submitted the article and just read this - yeah, you're probably right on the last one of these! Probably right on my understanding of computers too!
I think that the clip is generally OK - my main outrage which prompted me to submit the article was the ignorance of the people going on the course, any my sympathy for the programmers they work with!

garbage

[Anonymous Coward]

Anything that says "learn to code in a day" is full of shit. You might pick up some barebones basics, but you will definitely not being doing anything of consequence.

I can write that code!

[khasim]

Hire me. Just pay me 10% more than the rest of your team combined but I will deliver the code you need within 24 hours.

And I only have 2 requirements.

1. It does not have to work.

2. I do not have to maintain it.

WRITING code is easy.

Re:I can write that code!

[turbidostato]

"Writing good code that solves the problem the business needs solved is what is really hard."

Correction: getting the business people to know what the heck is the problem they in fact want to solve is the *really* difficult part.

Re:I can write that code!

[fuzzlost]

Usually the business people want to solve every problem they've thought up. The *incredibly* difficult part is getting the EMTs to the office in time because the business people have a heart attack when they see how much it will cost.

Mandatory Code Monkey quote

[ashshy]

Code Monkey think maybe manager want to write god damned login page himself
Code Monkey not say it out loud
Code Monkey not crazy, just proud

Re:Mandatory Code Monkey quote

[AwesomeMcgee]

I never learned how to use mod points but +1 for jonathon coulton reference, so true.

Re:Mandatory Code Monkey quote

[Lissajous]

I never learned how to use mod points but +1 for jonathon coulton reference, so true.

You don't use mod points, you program them. Apparently there's a site that can help you with this.

Excellent comparison with spoken language

[vlm]

The similarity with spoken language is uncanny.

Much as I can teach you "beer please?" and "where's the bathroom?" and "my /. UID is lower than yours" in spanish in about a day, I can probably teach you the crudest basics of any programming language in about a day.

I'm told that learning your 2nd 3rd 4th spoken language gets easier, every time you learn one you learn the next easier. Programming languages are certainly like that.

Even the epic overconfidence is similar. "I know how to ask for a beer in Spanish, I'm now fully qualified, lets book our flight to Spain!"

Also the teasing is similar. Sure kid, that "O(n^n^n) algorithm is perfectly scalable, you just roll that right out into production, testing in for wussies anyway" is the computer equivalent of teaching a noob that the foreign equivalent of "nice rack, wanna F" actually translates in English to "thank you"

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[gstoddart]

testing in for wussies anyway" is the computer equivalent of teaching a noob that the foreign equivalent of "nice rack, wanna F" actually translates in English to "thank you"

Please fondle my bum

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[vlm]

Whoa I just thought of another crazy comparison.

I dropped out of spanish because by third year my fellow classmates were entirely English as a Second Language students who were native speakers only showing up for an easy A, and as one of the last anglos I was way out of my league.

In a similar way the 1st semester CS classes are oriented toward walking total noobs thru "hello_world" at a speed they can follow, but by junior year or so almost all my classmates were like me, doing this stuff since we were like 6 years old, already know most of what the class would teach, better software/hardware/network at home that at school, already have industry jobs, etc.

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[rk]

My hovercraft is full of eels!

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[Teun]

"I know how to ask for a beer in Spanish, I'm now fully qualified, lets book our flight to Spain!"

No, not until you can ask for two beers.

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[firewrought]

The similarity with spoken language is uncanny.

The similarities go way deeper than that. Mainly, there is a strong isomorphism between how human and computer languages are encoded and interpreted/compiled.

At the lowest level, a digital "alphabet" must be imposed on this unruly analogue world. Human languages use phonemes (generally a few dozen distinct sounds) while computer languages use a character set (such as ASCII or Unicode). These alphabets are all basically a set of finite, unchanging, and meaningless symbols.

One level up are morphemes or words and word-parts that are constructed of phonemes. So "dog" is the name/morpheme we assign to the furry thing lifting its leg over your bedroom carpet; "urinate" is the morpheme we assign to its activity; and "ed" is the morpheme that signifies the activity has already completed (as in urinated). In computer languages this is called lexcal analysis, and it happens very early during compilation, usually with the help of regexps. In both cases, this phase transforms the fixed set of phonemes into a large, ever-growing set of meaningful symbols.

The next level up is syntax, in which a governing grammar (itself consisting of a closed set of abstract categories) is used to parse the morphemes/lexical tokens into tree-like data structures that will subsequently be used to determine relationships between word-units. This is where you start reading Chomsky or the Dragon book and reaching for the Midol. I don't know if it's Chomsky's fault or what, but there's a lot of similar terminology here between the same fields (e.g., syntax, grammar, parsing, production rules), as well as dissimilar terminology for roughly equivalent concepts (e.g., sentence<==>statement, clause<==>expression, paragraph<==>method).

After that comes semantics (assignment of meaning) and pragmatics (what things mean in context), for which you could find some suggestive connections with compilation (type-checking and processor-specific optimizations, perhaps), but here the easy/clean comparisons start to break down... probably because we still have a very limited understanding of how the human brain works. In both cases, it seems that there has to be a translation from the abstract, extracted idea down into the series of electrical impulses that yield a change in state of the target brain/computer.

As a completely separate topic, there is an isomorphism (in the sense of the term that Hofstadter uses in GEB) between how both human and computer languages evolve and branch cladistically with time. (And unsurprisingly, there is yet another isomorphism between biological evolution and language evolution.... we live in an endlessly fascinating world.)

Keep in mind, though, that we are ultimately finding similarities between things that are fundamentally different. Blindly inferring new "truths" about computer languages from human ones (or visa-versa) is a recipe for looking silly.

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[gstoddart]

Drop your panties, Sir William; I cannot wait until lunchtime!

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[Ryanrule]

Hell, coding is harder. You dont have to know anything to speak.

Re:Excellent comparison with spoken language

[fuzzlost]

Learning (spoken) languages after your second is easier because learning the second one taught you *how* to learn a language. Programming languages are like that because you learn logic, control, and algorithms. Once you learn the second language (as long as it's sufficiently different from the first), you've learned that different languages have different syntax issues or handle certain cases in different ways, so when you get to your third language, you already know exactly questions you need to ask to be proficient in it.

"In depth" ?

[careysb]

HTML, CSS, and Javascript all in one day and "in depth". Why not add C++, c#, regular expressions, and others as well?

Re:"In depth" ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because that would be two days.

Mod parent up

[PhrostyMcByte]

Someone who thinks they can code is far more dangerous than someone who realizes they can't and defers to experts. Pity the devs who'll have to suffer a bad manager going worse because of this!

Re:Mod parent up

[Rei]

Code monkey think maybe manager wanna write goddamn login page himself.
Code monkey don't say it out loud.
Code monkey not crazy, just proud.

Learn to write doggerel in a day

[Tough Love]

Learn to write doggerel in a day. Have fun. Don't expect to earn a living as a poet.

Re:Learn to write doggerel in a day

[dkleinsc]

Bad example: Not even good poets should expect to earn a living as a poet.

Here's your response

[Okian Warrior]

Response to your boss:

Coding is like chess. it's easy to learn, but takes a lifetime to master.

You can learn the rules of chess in a day, and you can play your first three matches on that same day. It takes a lifetime of study to be any good at chess, to be better than others at chess, or to compete in any way at chess.

Another way to put it is like guitar, or piano.

How long does it take to earn money playing guitar? Basic guitar takes about a week of practice, but how long will it take to earn money from playing it?

As with anything, there are basics as well as subtle, underlying principles. Coding, chess, guitar, piano, or any other refined action takes years of practice, experimentation, and learning to master. About 10,000 hours all told.

Then ask: "How many hours does it take to become a manager?"

Re:Here's your response

[turbidostato]

"Response to your boss:
Coding is like chess. it's easy to learn, but takes a lifetime to master."

Boss: chess? what's chess? that stupid game about moving little men on a checkered board? *I* make real men move at my will and it didn't take me "a life to master" (which obviously shows how and why I'm light years above you).

And now go do as commanded, you pawn!

Re:Here's your response

[manicb]

And continuing the analogy, it is really helpful if you're playing in a band to have a basic working understanding of everyone else's instruments. It means you can ask the bassist to use more hammer-ons in this section, and understand why the singer can't do endless loud high notes.

Re:Here's your response

[HeckRuler]

Then ask: "How many hours does it take to become a manager?"

Well my boss usually took an hour or two for lunch, plus there was the drinks afterwards, so it was about 4 hours total. Buy hey now, it took DECADES of being being his son. That's time I'm just not going to get back.

Meanwhile

[mwvdlee]

Meanwhile, us programmers don't need to take a "Management in 1 day" training. We develop translators: http://www.atrixnet.com/bs-generator.html

Re:Meanwhile

[dkleinsc]

Don't you worry about "in 1 day" training, let me worry about blank.

How to get free advertising dollars...

[GReaToaK_2000]

Make some insanely stupid comments of a technical nature and post it on /.

Sit back and watch your site get millions of hits.

You need to watch the programme first

[Anonymous Coward]

Ignore the summary and the article, watch the programme.

You'll see that it's not about learning the language well enough to do something, though they do get a working web page at the end, it's about knowing that you've got to write the code behind it. Too many managers don't get the concept of programing, thinking that it's just like learning how to use an application, and this course showed them that all those applications were actually written by people like the ones they employ.

Re:Everyone starts somewhere

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course everyone starts somewhere. But to think that you can program after a one-day course is as ridiculous as thinking you know a foreign language after a one-day course. The problem is not in starting, the problem is in thinking you've reached the destination when in reality you are barely away from the starting point.

I'd rather go with the 6 minute abs.

[Anonymous Coward]

Then i can just beat a nerd into programming for me.

Really? One day of HTML/JAVA/CSS?

[MiniMike]

Most people would get more benefit from the Abs class. Even if they only remember how to do a plank afterwards. What good does one day do? If you need to learn programming, you need to spend more time at it than this. It might make for a good intro to something, but it won't teach a newbie how to do anything useful as it seems to claim.

WARNING: Chess Analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole point of the class appears to be able to help people relate to the technicians that run their infrastructure. In the broadcast, the students learn how to use a GPS Java API along with very rudimentary HTML, and CSS. I have done that in a single 2 hour class. That makes them about as qualified to program as this /. post makes me qualified to write a sequel to Lord of the Rings.

You can teach someone the rules of Chess in a day, yet it takes years to master the game. Programming is the same. I can teach the syntax of HTML, CSS, and basic Java in a day (just like the BBC broadcast depicted), but the student will not know how to properly utilize the logic for years. Good luck with recursion, overloading functions, vulnerability testing, and many other concepts.

Re:WARNING: Chess Analogy

[Ryanrule]

Yeah, thats nice and all, but your typical ignorant suit will take this class and then assume he could personally replace every coder in the company, and still have time for his daily 3pm tee-off

Re:WARNING: Chess Analogy

[T Murphy]

Well it sounds like it would be a great class for a manager who thinks it will help them listen to their employees. It sounds like a horrible class if the manager thinks it will help their employees listen to them.

Re:WARNING: Chess Analogy

[jeremyp]

the students learn how to use a GPS Java API

Of all the places on the Internet, I used to think Slashdot would be the one where people know the difference between Java and Javascript.

This is why most MBAs should be fired

[s.petry]

Look, you could sit anyone down in a day and teach them looping and conditional expressions. Most people already understand variables, but you may have to teach them arrays. So what? This does not mean a person knows how to program. What that PHB stated is the equivalent to saying "Because I know the alphabet I can speak any language and write any novel". It's pure idiocy!

I have seen people come out of 4 years of College for coding and still not know their ass from a hole in the ground. Give them a non Microsoft product for development and they are completely lost. CSV or git, forget it. Distributed make? Maybe, but probably not. Half the time they don't even know how to find includes that are not spoon fed to them. Granted, there are some good ones out there, but mostly we churn out people that are retarded without a GUI to know most of what they need to know to do their job.

I'm sure that the person making these claims thinks they are all that and a bag of chips, but let him design a real program and see how smart he is. Give him a project that would take a real programmer a week. By the end of the week, you would start hearing the asshole complain about how the systems are all broken, probably even providing faked statistics to show everyone how the compilers are at fault.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[kat_skan]

I'm sure that the person making these claims thinks they are all that and a bag of chips, but let him design a real program and see how smart he is. Give him a project that would take a real programmer a week. By the end of the week, you would start hearing the asshole complain about how the systems are all broken, probably even providing faked statistics to show everyone how the compilers are at fault.

Forget about his programming chops—nobody with any sense would expect someone with no experience to be able to write anything non-trivial their first week. The more damning thing is that the guy's actual job is motivating people, and he's so inept at it that he thinks making them feel disposable and unessential will make them work faster. What a choad.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[s.petry]

Random technologies that "I happen to use"? Hardly, these are industry standards and used at most places (as well as other tools too numerous to count that are required for a job in programming). Using git at a basic level is not trivial, and you are not going to learn it in the same day you are learning the basics of a programming language.

Mind you, I did not go in to detail on all of the knowledge a person would lack in a day of training. Such a task is impossible to do within a day of typing. Perhaps you were making that point in a very shitty way, but it seems more that you defend TFA.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[Jeng]

I have seen people come out of 4 years of College for coding and still not know their ass from a hole in the ground.

The majority of people who go to college go to college for a diploma, any actual knowledge gained is a side effect and is for the most part completely accidental.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[Ryanrule]

You may think that, but you are wrong.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[IceNinjaNine]

Granted, there are some good ones out there, but mostly we churn out people that are retarded without a GUI to know most of what they need to know to do their job.

I believe I read a blurb in Dr Dobbs about this.. in the 1980s. They were talking about the future of software engineering, and that CASE (computer-aided software engineering) technicians would be numerous.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[s.petry]

You can show me that companies don't use tools? I believe that you are not thinking rationally. I have 25 years experience and been involved in countless projects working for more companies than I can count. Every single company uses tools to manage code and binaries, unless they are tiny shops that don't work for places that require the tools. This ranges from every Automotive company, to DOD and Military, to SAP and Oracle, and the people that develop CAE and CAD software. It's not like GM uses CVS and Ford uses nothing, it's that they all use tools to manage code! These same companies require their vendors, suppliers, and tool chains to use the same tools they use. Those same companies have developers working constantly on customizing the tool chains.

Do you think it's accidental that Eclipse, KDevelop, and just about every other IDE has interfaces for connecting to numerous code management systems? I guess in your world it's all useless bunk that nobody would ever use, but your world does not match the reality I have seen and lived in for a quarter century.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[Ryanrule]

"Using git at a basic level is not trivial"

For a competent programmer, yes it is.

You didnt even address my issue, you just picked a tangent and went with it.

Re:This is why most MBAs should be fired

[s.petry]

Why would you focus on "git" when it's not just knowledge of 1 tool required? Why do you ignore the fact that I pointed out a person would not learn this in a day in addition to learning to be a "programmer"? You also casually change your statement to dealing with a "competent programmer" where TFA and my statement deal with "teaching someone to be a programmer in a day". Obviously TFA nor myself deal with "competent programmers", but but novices "Learning in a day".

There was no issue that you presented that was rational or logical. If you presented a rational issue, I would have been able to respond. If you lose context between TFA and a post, shame on you.

What they should be teaching

[AwesomeMcgee]

This obviously is a horrible idea, but I started thinking what could they do in a day instead that would actually be beneficial to an organization, and I came up with this:
Spend a day teaching CPU architecture, memory structure, and end with showing how to manually layout a formal data structure or 2 in memory (something simple like a binary search tree). All done in lecture format obviously to get through it all.

By the end of the day there would be tangible benefit in that: Some of the folks would be smart enough to come away from it with an actual increased understanding of how computers actually work and might recognize the strictness of logic and unambiguous instruction they need. But above all else, all of them would walk away with a heightened respect for developers and an understanding why when a developer says he thinks a timeline might slip, you probably can't change that fact just by ignoring the dev, because again, the computer is strict and logical and cares not for your timeline.

Teach yourself programming in...

[PostPhil]

Teach Yourself Programming In Ten Years

Alphabets and languages

[Todd Knarr]

I know the Russian alphabet. That doesn't mean I speak or read Russian.

In one day, you're picking up the programming equivalent of the alphabet: what the letters in the language mean. Learning what the words mean, and how to string them together into coherent sentences, that takes a lot longer. Becoming fluent in it at the high-school level... that takes pretty much what it took for you to become fluent in whatever your native language is at the same level: 15 or so years of 24-hours-a-day immersion in it. Good luck cramming that into a single day.

They lost me at...

[mrjb]

"Do you know your Java from your CSS and your HTML?" Whoever wrote this, doesn't.

Dick and Jane

[MNNorske]

Anyone can learn to code. Just as anyone can learn to write a Dick and Jane story. Eight hours will teach someone to write rudimentary code in the proper grammer of whichever programming language they're approaching, something approaching the complexity of a Dick and Jane story. Eight hours will not however teach someone how to read or comprehend Shakespeare let alone write a full fledged, useful, and marketable application.

Inexperienced programmers suck

[bobbutts]

I'd rather they learn nothing than learn enough to fancy themselves ready to talk shop with a real programmer.

I learned me dentistry and brain surgery in a day

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I have a Black & Decker Drill, a Leatherman, and a can of furniture repair spackle.

Do any of you want to save money on health care . . . ?

They sound great!

[TheTrueScotsman]

How do I give one of them my interview coding test?

like the matrix

[dittbub]

i liked the testimonial comparing it to taking the blue pill from the matrix

They need a 2 day coder course

[xs650]

Their website is down, look like they need to hire someone who has completed a 2 day course to fix it

How many days training...

[JabrTheHut]

To take over the Marketing Director's job?

Cultural differences?

[DaveGod]

I didn't interpret anything in the segment implying that the one-day course is going to turn you into a developer. It seemed very obvious to me that it's an introducer type course - getting the gist over, a starting point for someone considering changing/supplementing careers or to have a vague idea what the developers at their work are doing.

Perhaps they could have spelt it out over and over again - well they did keep saying "basic" - but it seemed quite obvious to me. That's not to say those interpreting differently are stupid. If the US TV imported over here is any indication, US TV likes to really spells things out - if that's what you're used to then it's quite reasonable to expect it.

I'm a qualified accountant, I could teach the basics of accountancy in one day. Enough to be an accountant the next day? No. Enough to help someone decide if it might be a career for them? Yes. Enough to enable a manager to make good use of reporting? Yes. Enough for a manager to broadly understand what their accounting staff are doing and why they cannot have the accounts "Monday"? Yes.

Re:Cultural differences?

[DaveGod]

So I hit submit, move to the next site on my browsing routine and find a somewhat relevant comic, today's Dilbert.

No, No, No, You've Got It All Wrong

[jeko]

"learn ... in ten easy minutes

Screw learning. With my new Sarah Palin Voyage of Self-Discovery and the Christian Buddha, you'll discover that you always knew the answers in your heart all along. Trying to become some so-called "expert" by doing things like "studying" just makes you an elite egghead who gets all wishy-washy when it comes to the truthiness of anything.

You already know the answer, and you know that you do! Don't let those gosh-darned experts tell you any different!

Act now, and we'll bonus you with the Anthony Robbins method "Solve Any Problem in Three Easy Steps!"

Step One: It's not a problem. It's a challenge!
Step Two: You can Always Decide to Meet That Challenge!
Step Three: Once you Decide to Meet that Challenge, It's Been Met! Problem Solved with nothing more than the Power of your Mind!

Re:No, No, No, You've Got It All Wrong

[Peristaltic]

I laughed out loud at this until it hit me how many people probably roll through life this way.

Re:No, No, No, You've Got It All Wrong

[steelfood]

Problem Solved with nothing more than the Power of your Mind!

Or in Sarah Palin's case, a hunting rifle.

How to learn a language in 24 hours

[davidwr]

Assume you want to learn a language well enough to be better than a novice, but not much better, and you have 24 working hours to do it.

Method one: Already know a language that is so similar to what you are learning that you don't have much to learn, and with so few major differences that you don't have much to un-learn. 15 years ago a C guru could pick up a "journeyman"-level skill in C++ or Objective-C in 24 hours. I'm not sure the same is true today, as all 3 languages are much richer now.

Method two: Learn a very simple language. Some scripting languages qualify. There was even a book called "JavaScript in 24 hours" or something like that. I think that might have been a bit optimistic for JavaScript though.

Method three: Learn a language which is linguistically almost identical to several other languages that you already know backwards an forwards and whose vocabulary is small enough to master in a day. If you know several procedural programming languages, learning another that is a near-clone to the ones you know won't take long.

As for teaching a non-programmer both how to program and the language in such a short period of time, it's not possible outside of very simplistic environments. Lego (a children's programming language), some flavors of Pascal, Hypercard (Apple, 1980s-1990s), and a few others come closest. In industry, some special-purpose, limited-purpose languages can also be taught to non-programmers in 24 teaching+lab hours. But these aren't the same as "learning to code" as a professional developer.

A day to learn, a life time to master

[BetaDays]

A day to learn, a life time to master. Nuff said.

dont know what you're talking about.

[nimbius]

In each interview im very frank with the PHB about my skill level. Ive coded infinite loops that execute in milliseconds and are written in under a week. These days whenever a big project comes around, the boss just nods and says "Wally's on it!"

Learning to code may take a day...

[davidwr]

Learning to find and remove all of the bugs takes a lifetime.

Re:Learning to code may take a day...

[Alex Belits]

Learning to find and remove all of the bugs takes a lifetime.

Learning how not to make bugs takes more than a lifetime, but some programmers can approach this condition closely enough. This is why they are valuable.

Speaking a language and writing a novel in a day

[davidwr]

speak any language and write any novel

Oh, but you can do both in a day, if you don't count the time it takes to actually type up the words. 100K words at 40wpm will be 2500 hours just for the typing. There are very few authors that I'd want to read if they only had 24 hours to come up with an idea, draft the novel in their brain, then start typing every waking hour until they put the final punctuation mark on the final sentence, without any corrections beyond real-time typo-fixing.

But as for being able to communicate effectively and having a novel that people will enjoy reading and recommend to others, not so much.

Classes can teach you syntax, but...

[RobinH]

Experience teaches you how to manage complexity, which is the number one limitation on building big programs. Anyone can learn to knock together a program with a few buttons on a window in a day, the same as I can teach you how to build a shed in a day. That doesn't mean you're qualified to build a house (or a skyscraper).

Do they have permission for those logos?

[Kaptain Kruton]

The testimonial page on their site is covered with the logos of major companies (eg: Google, Ebay, Facebook, Wired, etc). I cannot help but wonder if they have permission to use all of these logos.

Nice for hobbyists

[thetoadwarrior]

It's nice for someone who just wants to tinker but the problem is that you will get people who think they can do your job and sorry, you can't learn to be a good developer off something like this. It may start you on your path but if a manager were to do this course and start talking shit, that's when I'd hand in my notice and tell him to have fun with it.

This is one of the most brilliant, general, ...

[gatesstillborg]

efficient marketing strategies ever devised: simply convince someone who doesn't know anything that they actually know something.

A great illustration of this was the old commercial for the Goodyear Arriva tires. They had some funky, swirly tread pattern, which, though it reduced the contact area by perhaps close to 50%, gave the observer the impression of a certain shape and channels to move water away. They had great shots of subjects explaining this using "whooshing" hand gestures. I don't recall the tires having stayed around that long, but I don't doubt that they at least paid for their not insubstantial marketing campaign.

Asking the wrong question.

[willy_me]

As a developer, I find it important to ask the question "Why?". Tasks are performed to solve problems. Those who contract out tasks (the employer) understand the problem but typically lack the expert knowledge required to devise the best possible solution. The employer can devise a solution, break it into tasks, and contract out those tasks; but results are typically less then optimal.

What developers should to is to try to understand the underlying problem so their expert knowledge can assist in designing an optimal solution. So when one is asked "Can you do this?" they should reply with "Probably, but why is it required?". Depending on the answer the correct response will probably be along the lines of "Yes, but there is a better way to solve that problem".

For example, a person might go into a store and ask a clerk for an iPad. A good clerk would politely ask why they want an iPad. If the customer was looking for a highly mobile device for reasons .... then a 7" Android tablet might be better. In this example the customer lacks expert knowledge regarding tablet devices and their proposed solution was less then optimal. By understanding the underlying problem, the clerk is able to recommend the most appropriate device. It is the same for developers - take the time to understand the problem if you want the customer to be happy.

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[Mike Buddha]

For example, a person might go into a store and ask a clerk for an iPad. A good clerk would politely ask why they want an iPad. If the customer was looking for a highly mobile device for reasons .... then a 7" Android tablet might be better. In this example the customer lacks expert knowledge regarding tablet devices and their proposed solution was less then optimal. By understanding the underlying problem, the clerk is able to recommend the most appropriate device. It is the same for developers - take the time to understand the problem if you want the customer to be happy.

The last thing I want when going into a store to make a purchase is some dillwad sales clerk second guessing my researched decision.

I agree that you need to find out why people are asking for what they're asking. I just hate dillwad sales clerks.

As a developer, I've learned that it's a large part of my job to educate project stakeholders on what is possible and practical, as well as to do what they ask. The most successful projects are ones where the stakeholders explain the entire process to me and we work together to come up with a good solution. The worst ones are when a stakeholder comes to me with an inflexible pre-conceived notion of what needs to be done. Most of the time, these projects take too long and they never work as well as the principles envisioned.

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[Eponymous Hero]

absolutely true

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[b4dc0d3r]

Wouldn't you be playing the part of the dillwad sales clerk when you educate stakeholders? And wouldn't you also be the one with the inflexible pre-conceived notion when you enter the store with what you call a researched decision?

You may think no, there's a difference. But that's only from your perspective.

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[jeremyp]

The optimal solution is the one that makes the store the most margin for the least amount of sales effort while not pissing off the customer so that they don't come back. Sell him the damn iPad.

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[Mike Buddha]

The difference is that I have 20+ years of experience with a variety of technologies and projects and he has 3 months experience shovelling whatever the higher ups tell him is the best product, what he reads on the internet, and what he hears from his friends.

When I walk into Fry's looking for a cheap HDMI cable, I don't need some dope pushing Monster cables at me. (Which has happened. I asked him again, nicely, where the $1.77 6' Shaxon HDMI cables were, and to his credit he relented and pointed them out to me, but not without expressing his disappointment with my choice of a lower quality AV experience.)

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[BevanFindlay]

Having semi-recently worked in a small computer retail store, the iPad will never be the option with the most margin for the store - Apple don't believe in giving small stores any margin (we would actually *lose* money on smaller iPods once you factored in shipping costs etc). Not that Apple would actually let us sell iPads, even though we were apparently an "Approved Partner". One got quite good at talking customers out of buying Apple products (which they were - pretty much without exception - only buying on hype anyway).

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[graphius]

I hate comments like "I wish I had mod points" but...

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[MadKeithV]

The difference is that I have 20+ years of experience with a variety of technologies and projects and he has 3 months experience shovelling whatever the higher ups tell him is the best product, what he reads on the internet, and what he hears from his friends.

But in custom software development this situation is nearly always reversed. The customer might have 20+ years of experience doing the business she's doing, but she knows next to nothing about developing software, and has probably developed a very myopic view of the problem and its possible solutions. That's where the guys with software development experience, and experience in solving problems from multiple domains, can come up with a solution that's much better for the actual problem that needs solving.

Re:Asking the wrong question.

[Mike Buddha]

Exactly, which is why it's best to work with the customer to understand their process then come up with a solution. I have had projects where the customer came to me knowing exactly what they needed (usually a very small project) and there were no objections from me to building it exactly as they had spec'ed it. Most of the time, the customers come to me with a vague notion of what they want and if they're flexible we can come to some middle ground that will make them much more happy in the end. If they come to me with a vague notion and aren't willing to budge, then I build it; they see the errors of their way and revise the project, and I build it; they find more problems, and I build it; and on and on and on. It's profitable for me, but I don't like working on those projects. Usually around the 3rd or 4th iteration, they start asking me for input, and the thing gets wrapped up, but now instead of starting a fresh code base, I have a half-assed legacy application that I have to adapt to the new design.

The problem isn't that the customer doesn't know what they want, it's that they don't know what we can do for them. I have no doubt that they understand their processes way better than I will.

I just wish there were salespeople who would take a moment to ask me what I'm looking for in a product with the knowledge, experience, and honesty to make a decent recommendation :)

Re:Darmok and Jalad, At Tanagra

[HeckRuler]

SHAKA! When the walls fell...

How To Make A Great Income Off Of Idiots

[treeves]

...please send $29.95, plus $12.50 shipping and handling, for your copy today!
Money Back Guarantee!

"Learn to code in a day,,,,,,"

[Slugster]

",,,,,,because the asking wages still aren't low enough!"

For as much as an enthusiast as I am about computers and programming in general, I still don't do it for a living nor do I see it as a skill that "everyone" has a need to learn--nor is it (along with "COMPUTERS in the CLASSROOM!!!") a grand solution to anything.

We might compare the whole idea to that of making shoes: most people (who own a computer) wear shoes, yet very very few of those people know how to make a pair of decent (wearable, durable) shoes.
And honestly, there is little financial or technical reason for them to.
Shoe-making is a high-income occupation for a talented few and a some others do it as a hobby, but mostly it is a sweatshop job done under third-world conditions and paying poverty wages. It is not a job they'd choose--and for most, it's not even a job to realistically train for.

There is no useful reason to require that every kid in school learn to make shoes. Or code.