 Notice. New forum software under development. It's going to miss a few functions and look a bit ugly for a while, but I'm working on it full time now as the old forum was too unstable. Couple days, all good. If you notice any issues, please contact me. |
Forum Index : Microcontroller and PC projects : 0.3%
  Page 2 of 3   |
|||||
| Author | Message | ||||
| Paul_L Guru  Joined: 03/03/2016 Location: United StatesPosts: 769 |
Hmmmmmm ... well, no, it is not a philosophical discussion, nor is it surprising that only 0.3% of the population can write a computer program. It is a function of individual aptitudes. Aptitudes are very difficult to dig out of the brain. The Johnson O'Connor Research Foundation has been trying since 1922 when Johnson O'Connor was hired by General Electric to measure whether people were doing jobs which were natural to their abilities. Most people just don't think rationally enough to automatically generate flow charts mentally and therefore are not going to be efficient at writing complicated programs. It's a special trait which is not necessarily shared by painters, physicists, physicians, people who possess a preponderant propensity to perambulate through a polysyllabic vocabulary, or even most engineers. Strangely, it does seem to be shared by performing musicians and orchestrators, but not necessarily by composers. In other words, in 1869, when Charles MacDonald and Arthur B. Paine were hired by The Manhattan Bridge Building Company to design the The Poughkeepsie Railroad Bridge, using empirical methods involving scale models instrumented with strain gauges to measure the logitudeinal forces expected in the truss elements, their aptitudes were probably not conducive to writing computer programs, but they were able to design the then longest, highest, and heaviest load truss bridge in the world. In other words, successful computer programmers are likely to be very weird people. They are also likely to be able to write extremely long sentences.  Paul in NY |
||||
| Warpspeed Guru Joined: 09/08/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 4406 |
I disagree  Why does a computer program ALWAYS have to be very long and so complicated it poses a problem so complex it simply cannot be created or understood by a mere mortal ? Some programs such as making a led blink on and off repetitively is still a valid computer program. And you don't have to be a fringe weirdo to write the code. Although come to think of it, most of my professional IT friends are a bit er, strange. But maybe that is just coincidence. Cheers, Tony. |
||||
Turbo46 Guru Joined: 24/12/2017 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1593 |
Of course a program doesn't have to be long and complicated. Check out TassyJim's file copy program for Grogster on another nearby post. Short, elegant and prevents a lot of repetitive work. It doesn't have to be useful either, just has to satisfy someone's desire to display a pretty pattern or some such. I suspect that the 0.3% number is pretty right. How many people can read a schematic circuit diagram? Let alone design the circuit. Regarding IT people, in my previous experience at work, I found them to be control freaks. Bill Keep safe. Live long and prosper. |
||||
| PeterB Guru Joined: 05/02/2015 Location: AustraliaPosts: 639 |
At the risk of being a bit silly, can I ask "when is a program not a program?" Anybody who wants to can learn to write HELLO WORLD but most people don't. So I'm a bit confused about where does programming start and finish. I still think defining the problem is the hard bit. And I'm happy to get into my car and turn the key. My days of choke, clutch, gear stick, manual spark advance what else are gone and good riddance.  Peter |
||||
| Turbo46 Guru Joined: 24/12/2017 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1593 |
10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD" Is a program, but if I copy it from a book, does that make me a programmer? One person wrote it but half the world copied it in a host of different programming languages. Apparently only 0.3% of us can expand on that to do something more. Also, seems it that "programmer" is too long a word - it's coding now. Bill Keep safe. Live long and prosper. |
||||
bigmik Guru Joined: 20/06/2011 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2870 |
Hi All, Actually I wrote that code... I am just now calculating how much royalty 0.3% of the world owes me. Now where did I put my iPhone? Hmmm Kind Regards Mick Mick's uMite Stuff can be found >>> HERE (Kindly hosted by Dontronics) <<< |
||||
Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
Every routine is a program, the rest depends on the particular hardware you want to use. First take yourself: 6.00 a.m: Get Up 6.10 a.m.: Splash Face 6.20 a.m.: Breakfast ... 8.32 a.m.: If 6.00 a.m. <> 1 Then HURRY ... just something that can be simply done with a flowchart. Here programming starts! Nearly everyone wants to live homoestatically and a simply structured life supports that, this is just running a program. Birth Education Marriage Death could just be the main code around it. Electrically: If you have a simple NE555-Monoflop and you screw on the potentiometer then you are already programming the Chip! If you take transistors instead then you are programming the descrete circuit. I think this issue is not about how to become a perfect coder rather then simply understanding how the system, that is professionally managed by different specialists, is working for being a dependent part or user of it ourselves Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
Just some elaboration: 10 BIRTH = 1 20 FOR EDUCATION = 1 TO 13 21 PARTY >= 1 22 GIRLS >= 1 23 FUN > 13 25 NEXT EDUCATION 30 MARRIAGE = 1: SOCIAL LIFE = 0 40 DO WORKLIFE 50 LOOP UNTIL DEATH 60 WORMFEED = 1 70 REM: Alternatively: GOTO 10 Itīs not about the Syntax, just about the Flow!   Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
CircuitGizmos Guru Joined: 08/09/2011 Location: United StatesPosts: 1421 |
Marriage is a subroutine of Death. Micromites and Maximites! - Beginning Maximite |
||||
| Tinine Guru Joined: 30/03/2016 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1646 |
Recursive |
||||
| Turbo46 Guru Joined: 24/12/2017 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1593 |
The above may may all be true, if a bit cynical, but the original post was about programming computers. @ bigmik: I didn't use your program I just quoted it. Bill Keep safe. Live long and prosper. |
||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
Itīs all included: MARRIAGE = SOCIAL DEATH SOCIAL DEATH => DEGRADATION DEGRADATION => IMMISERIZATION IMMISERIZATION => FRUSTRATION FRUSTRATION => .... ... => DEATH ... I should have a check up for my suicidal tendencies! But statistically husbands live longer than non-husbands! So for some the agony apparently never ends... ... but (hopefully, just as for myself) for most people real life has just begun! (do I see a "gun" in there?") OK, back to topic.  Just imagine Coding as some kind of communication based on a particular kind of structured thinking. Within this forum it already became a part of general communication. Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| Volhout Guru Joined: 05/03/2018 Location: NetherlandsPosts: 3532 |
It is all about complexity. Even my 7 year old grand daughter used MMbasic to write the inevitable "hello world". Did not have to explain a lot. That is on a maximite, with VGA screen connected and wired PS2 keyboard. But try to send "hello world" to an iPhone (the world they live in) is not so simple. People loose interest if it is too complex. As result they cannot program. Look at what we offer them to learn programming today: arduino, raspberry pi, and the multitude off programming languages, all different. HTML ? PHP ? python ? C ? C++ ? C# ? I grew up with integer basic (acorn atom) and assembly (56 instructions in a 6502). So the world looked much simpler back then. learning was simpler, and thus growing was simpler. Volhout PicomiteVGA PETSCII ROBOTS |
||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
... and the simplicity of understanding it! We have to differ between using it, making it and simply understanding it. The simple user generally is considered being stupid and therefore the usage is made as simple (or stupid) as possible with many colours, pictures, sounds and whatever. Making it run this way is very complex ... ... but understanding how it is generally working isnīt that at all. A computer still is just a scad of transistors and binary still means on or off. But most people just want to use and not to understand and those who want to understand are overwhelmed by all that bling-bling (taking most process power). That is why I do not like all that unnecessary stuff, a simple terminal, white on black (or some colours as well) really satisfies me. Too much clicking on buttons and checkboxes overstrains me, I prefer readable codelines, because I could program a checkbox if I wanted to, but I cannot see what command really is behind a stupid checkbox within those "User-Targeted-Programs" or remembering where to find the one I need (f****ing GUIīs) A very simple example: I love ROBOCOPY but without any GUI, just inside the Command-Window. Just saw a documentary about animals making and using tools: The Ape takes a stick or blade of grass to pick out insects from woodlogs and the raven even works on it before to form a hook. Now if the computer or electronic device is our stick then it is much better to be able to understand how it generally works and therefore transform it into whatever tool we particularly need. Just a little step for anyone and itīs already done if the one who types "Hello World" subsequently says to himself "Wow! Now I want to try ... on this!" For all others the Black Box is just a Brick! Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
... AND with that it is no problem at all to program a little routine in BASIC (or any other language), doing some certain backups frequently (and going further THEN you can change to directly shell programming for being not too different). Qualitatively something like this should be the next step after "Hello World" ... or just something like a thermostat on the Maximite, just something small but neat and useful. And even if this was the last step this would break through the 0.3% by far. And the rest about understanding computers and technology will just come along all by itself, even not "over-geeking" it all. Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
Still thinking about this topic I just came back to this story (from 2006): https://www.salon.com/2006/09/14/basic_2/ ... and I can still remember myself, that in the 80īs in many math-books there was BASIC ... I also have some particular ones specially about "Math for BASIC". ...and that actually was the reason for me to get back to BASIC after decades, I simply wanted to treat my PC as what it originally is - a calculator (literaly from latin computare, in german language a Computer is also generally called a "Rechner", which literally means "Calculator") and I remembered how easy it was to loop math functions and doing so just reminded me how much more could be easily done this way. Now the other way round as described in the article, this was how young kids easily got hooked on programming. And since 2006 many new and powerful BASICīs came up, including MMBASIC ... and digging deeper it actually never disappeared, it just got forgotten by the masses and not relevantly rediscovered yet.  Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| Warpspeed Guru Joined: 09/08/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 4406 |
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. As the old joke goes... It only seems longer Cheers, Tony. |
||||
| BrianP Senior Member  Joined: 30/03/2017 Location: AustraliaPosts: 292 |
My head is spinning! (and I'm very worried...) I find myself agreeing with virtually everyone's comments  As the bulk of this thread seems to fit into the "old & grumpy" category, here's my one-line 2c worth. Make every school & university run a compulsory subject called "life skills" (But then how many teachers / lecturers would actually be qualified to teach?) It just seems to me that the lack of an inquiring mind is mainly due to the fact that in many of our educational institutions there is no requirement for students to have one - just tick all the boxes & you graduate  TassyJim's uni comment sums it up - but we need to learn how to learn & apply to all facets of life. B |
||||
| Poppy Guru Joined: 25/07/2019 Location: GermanyPosts: 486 |
Sounds like Party https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpmTe3TDdVU ... thatīs all about Philosophy ... having parties in our head! In German we have a term for this, literally translated "Headwanking", just imagine a very focused rubbing facepalm ... rethinking and rethinking and rethinking ... As the classic Tech-Philosopher Marvin said: More Douglas Adams than Plato ... In my personal belief real life ends when we stop learning, questioning and taking consequences! The direction where each one goes can be different, but the internal value counts meaning each individual should become able to chose directions and take responsibilities. So coding is just as important as learning any other communication, at least like foreign languages or simple latin, ancient greek or whatever. Just like anything else that enlarges our personal window to the world outside, the one there was, is and will be! If I had not learned any understanding of the english language as another example then I would not be here ... bothering you all!  School in my opinion does not prepare for real life, it intentionally and therefore exclusively prepares for worklife ... for being just a technical institution as a simple pre-stage for University (being just more school) or apprenticeship, the rest is up to the parents being in full charge! To understand, maintain and probably change the system we have to understand it ... at least how it goes! ... and that spins me round ... back to Computers, they are just a system, but more and more our social system gets based on them, so the technical importance of understanding in this direction rises more and more. Andre ... such a GURU? | ||||
| JohnS Guru Joined: 18/11/2011 Location: United KingdomPosts: 3659 |
I must have been very lucky as my schools did teach me to think and to learn for myself, which I did (originally from books and other people who were only sometimes teachers by employment - oh and also by reading programs when my interest was computer-related). I thought the ability to learn like that was what many people acquired from school (and perhaps from non-school). It has seemed that many people I've known did likewise learn to think and learn for themselves. I'm doubtful it's just me and people I've known! Sadly I've also met plenty who won't put in any effort to learn or think for themselves but I don't think school was by any means the sole cause. John |
||||
| Page 2 of 3 |
|||||
 Print this page |
