Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Programming

Nvidia CEO Says Kids Shouldn't Learn To Code 165

theodp writes: Asked at the recent World Government Summit in Dubai what people should focus on when it comes to education, what should they learn, and how they should educate their kids and their societies, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang made a counterintuitive break from tech CEOs advising youngsters to learn how to code. Huang argued that, even at this early stage of the AI revolution, programming is no longer a vital skill. With coding taken care of by AI, Huang suggested humans can instead focus on more valuable expertise like biology, education, manufacturing, or farming

From the video: "You probably recall over the course of the last 10 years, 15 years, almost everybody who sits on a stage like this would tell you it is vital that your children learn computer science, everybody should learn how to program, and in fact it's almost exactly the opposite. It is our job to create computing technology such that nobody has to program and that the programming language, it's human, everybody in the world is now a programmer. This is the miracle, this is the miracle of artificial intelligence. For the very first time, we have closed the gap, the technology divide has been completely closed and it's the reason why so many people can engage artificial intelligence. It is the reason why every single government, every single industrial conference, every single company is talking about artificial intelligence today. Because for the very first time you can imagine everybody in your company being a technologist.

"And so, this is a tremendous time for all of you to realize that the technology divide has been closed. Or another way to say it, the technology leadership of other countries has now been reset. The countries, the people that understand how to solve a domain problem in digital biology, or in education of young people, or in manufacturing or in farming, those people who understand domain expertise now can utilize technology that is readily available to you. You now have a computer that will do what you tell it to do to help automate your work, to amplify your productivity, to make you more efficient. And so, I think that this is just a tremendous time. The impact of course is great and your imperative to activate and take advantage of the technology is absolutely immediate. And also to realize that to engage AI is a lot easier now than at any time in the history of computing. It is vital that we upskill everyone and the upskilling process, I believe, will be delightful, surprising, to realize that this computer can perform all these things that you're instructing it to do and doing it so easily."

Huang's words come as tech-backed nonprofit Code.org-- which is lobbying to make CS a high school graduation requirement in all 50 states -- hedges its bets by also including AI usage as part of its mission through its new TeachAI initiative (trademark pending). Interestingly, conspicuous by its absence from the Who's Who of tech giants on the advisory committee for the Code.org staffed-and-operated TeachAI is Nvidia (Nvidia is also missing from the list of Code.org donors). So, is it time to revisit the question of Is AI an Excuse for Not Learning To Code?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nvidia CEO Says Kids Shouldn't Learn To Code

Comments Filter:
  • AI is cheeeeep (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:08AM (#64269124)

    The idiocracy is here. AI will write all code, and it'll be trash code, but it'll be cheeeeep.

    Humans will once again become agrarian slaves to the oligarchy.

    • Re:AI is cheeeeep (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jmccue ( 834797 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @11:06AM (#64269462) Homepage

      In a way I think he is right, but for the wrong reason. Education before college should focus on everything, not just one thing. When you get to college, you should have very good knowledge about Advanced Math, History, Art, Communication, Shop(?) and yes Tech from a general level. The child should be exposed to all possible career options.

      By general tech, I mean simple Octal Math, Hex Math, UTF-8 encoding, Logic and things like that, not a focus on some probably dumb Microsoft Programming Environment.

      When you get to College or Univ or some advanced tech school, that is where you learn specifics based upon what you learned in the past.

      • I disagree. Coding teaches how to translate a text or an idea into formulas/algorithms.

        When I was at high school in the early eighties, the physics teachers in my country had conspired to do a test where they intentionally left out one of the parameters which should be given (it was an exercise on a transition between water and ice, but the density of ice was missing). I noticed that this was missing, and wanted to warn the teacher about it. He looked at me, signed that I should remain silent while lookin
        • by Roger W Moore ( 538166 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @01:07PM (#64269860) Journal

          I disagree. Coding teaches how to translate a text or an idea into formulas/algorithms

          I'd argue for the reverse. You should learn how to codify maths and physics questions into algebra first, before you learn how to program since learning algebra, at the same time as learning how to code an algorithm is going to make things much, much more difficult. If you start programming already understanding the basics of algebra you'll have a much easier time understanding a variable.

          the physics teachers in my country had conspired to do a test where they intentionally left out one of the parameters which should be given

          In physics questions, you always need to give the parameters even if you just define the algebraic symbol, or at least state what the parameters are that you will accept in the question otherwise how does anyone know what form you want the answer in? We regularly did both numerical and algebraic response questions (and mixed) in both maths and physics at school but it was always clear what form the question wanted the answer in. If it's acceptable to make up your own algebraic symbols then questions become trivial to answer: the answer is just x where x is defined as the quantity you are looking for. What you describe is a badly written question that students struggled to answer because they had no clue what the question was wanting, not because they struggled with the physics or maths it was actually testing.

          • by vux984 ( 928602 )

            Really, you've never been asked to solve a question like:

            Q) What is the volume of a box where the length of a side is 15m and the depth is 12m?

            A) V = 180w, where V is the volume (in cubic meters), and w is the width of the box (in meters).

            This is pretty standard form of a question in math, physics, and chemistry too for that matter.

            • Yes, really I have never been asked to solve such a badly written question like that, even back in primary school when questions like that were asked. Indeed, your answer is wrong because at no point are you told that the box is cuboid. You see we were always told to be very careful in science about making unwarranted assumptions like the one you just made about the shape of the box. If we were asked a question like that then the box would have been specified as cuboid and the width would have been given as
              • by vux984 ( 928602 )

                "Indeed, your answer is wrong because at no point are you told that the box is cuboid"

                You needed to be told a box is cuboid? Have you seen a box? When working on word problems, understanding the most likely meaning of the question is part of the solution. Word problems are always ambiguous at some level. So, while yes there are certainly plenty of non-cuboid boxes in the world, unless you were told it was a heart shaped box, or something else, then cuboid is the default shape for a 'box'.

                "You see we were al

          • What you describe is a badly written question

            Indeed, and it was on purpose to test how the students would react to that.

            You should learn how to codify maths and physics questions into algebra first

            The point is that we did, for several years even, but still everybody failed to apply it when they had to do it without being told to do so.

          • I'd argue for the reverse. You should learn how to codify maths and physics questions into algebra first, before you learn how to program since learning algebra, at the same time as learning how to code an algorithm is going to make things much, much more difficult.

            I learned them simultaneously more or less, the first at school, the second self taught (also at school since they had the computers). The latter often gave me a reason to want to learn the former, and the drive to push on it because I could do

      • In a way I think he is right, but for the wrong reason. Education before college should focus on everything, not just one thing.

        Yes, but that argument is an argument for learning basic coding, not against it. Computers are as prevalent today as a notepad used to be. It's arguably as important to know the basics of these devices as it used to be to know how to do joined-up handwriting. It does not matter whether you go into STEM, the Arts or a professional program you'll be using computers so a simple, low-

  • by ei4anb ( 625481 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:09AM (#64269126)
    What could possible go wrong if we leave application design and coding to AI without enough people who could understand the result? I use compilers but I am also experienced in assembler and machine language so that I can troubleshoot, debug, and find security vulnerabilities.
    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:24AM (#64269164)

      Hush! This is perfect job security for us!

      AI creates crappy code that is easily broken so everyone will want a security guru to fix those holes. That should take us to retirement.

    • by sinij ( 911942 )

      What could possible go wrong if we leave application design and coding to AI without enough people who could understand the result?

      Yes, but that ship already sailed. Most IT products today slapped together from third-party open source components. You don't code your protocol libraries, your databases, your web server, your logging, etc. Having AI do this (for most projects) is just one more step in the same direction. For important stuff, like coding crypto, you will have people that know what they are doing coding. The rest - AI can take care of it.

      • by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

        You don't code your protocol libraries, your databases, your web server, your logging, etc. Having AI do this (for most projects) is just one more step in the same direction.

        It's not the same. Right now you can go into one of those open source libraries and fix bugs (or at least send a pull request). You can't do that if nobody knows how to code, or the AI writes such horribly incomprehensive code that nobody could understand it.

  • Seems backwards... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oic0 ( 1864384 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:09AM (#64269130)
    I would think AI would eventually be very good at biology, farming, manufacturing, education... and running companies... but at the end of the day you still need some people who can read and understand the computer code that's being used in the AI systems themselves. We obviously wont need as many, but I can't see it being harder hit than any other industry.
    • by dvice ( 6309704 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @10:32AM (#64269350)

      If we have an AI that can fully replace a programmer, then we have an AI which we can ask to write a software that solves any task in farming, manufacturing or education, or any other problem.

      I don't know what will be the 3 last jobs for humans, but I know that programmer and scientist will be 2 of them.

      But obviously it is possible that AI will speed up programming, for example by finding 90% of the bugs from the code. That alone would be a huge improvement in development speed.

      • Surely the oldest profession will be the last one.
        • Surely the oldest profession will be the last one.

          Not at all, AI girlfriends are quickly taking over that role.

        • Sexbots work 24x7 without the need to sleep or eat and can quick charge. They’ll do whatever the client wnats, even stuff that is impossible and/or illegal with humans. And they are very submissive and if properly cleaned after use, disease-free. They also can’t get pregnant.

          The average future sexbot will look and feel much more sexy than the average prostitute, too.

      • But obviously it is possible that AI will speed up programming, for example by finding 90% of the bugs from the code. That alone would be a huge improvement in development speed.

        From what I recall, automated theorem proving used to be a branch of AI, back in the older definitions of AI. There are languages with that integrated (Ada SPARK) which are used for high reliability software.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 )

      I would think AI would eventually be very good at biology, farming, manufacturing, education... and running companies...

      Yeah but that learning process will be tough on humanity. By the end of its learning processes, by the time it has mastered those fields, AI will have killed off the bulk of humanity through design error that it implemented flawlessly in code. Design errors reflecting its lack of understanding in biology, farming, manufacturing, etc.

    • I would think AI would eventually be very good at biology, farming, manufacturing, education... and running companies... but at the end of the day you still need some people who can read and understand the computer code that's being used in the AI systems themselves.

      There are plenty of stories dealing with this. Star Trek:TNG found a society similar to what we are going to do: let a computer handle "everything" while we just become artists and dilettantes. You say that we need 'people' who understand things. The people in power think they do understand things. What will happen is that your concerns will be ignored because the people who are in a position to make a difference think they are the difference that is needed to keep things under control.

      Of course, Reality wi

  • partly (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nicubunu ( 242346 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:13AM (#64269138) Homepage

    While I do agree the world has no need for so many programmers, I also agree programming (algorithms, flowcharts) modeled in what I think is a good way my style of thinking and solving problems. Yes, a majority of people have no need to use C++, but they need to analyze and solve problems.

    • While I do agree the world has no need for so many programmers, I also agree programming (algorithms, flowcharts) modeled in what I think is a good way my style of thinking and solving problems. Yes, a majority of people have no need to use C++, but they need to analyze and solve problems.

      That's the crux of programming. As a "not-quite a programmer" I can say with pretty good insight that successful programmers do not think quite like other people.

      It makes sense to expose people to programming, but it has to appeal to the synapses of the individuals that decide that is what they want to do for a living.

      What is more, I'm pretty sure the proto - programmers ted to find that is something they like to do without school intervention.

      So sure, expose them to a little coding - but don't expect

    • by wwphx ( 225607 )
      I think people should be exposed to programming, but it shouldn't be crammed down their throats. Programming requires talent and aptitude, and if you don't got it, you'll be a poor to adequate programmer. And we really don't need more of those. I can visualize database schema in my head and practically go straight to a working model with no difficulty, but that's me. Meanwhile, everybody has Microsoft Access on their desktop and thinks they're experts.

      Oh, the horrors that I have seen over the years!
  • by Pseudonymous Powers ( 4097097 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:17AM (#64269146)
    Also, kids shouldn't learn history, because books have been better at knowing history than people for about 6000 years now.
    • We really only teach the notable highlights of History; it isn't hammered into each student with the intent of having each one pursue a career as a historian. When a student does show an aptitude and interest in history, they can voluntarily choose to make it their major in college. So should it also be for CS. Not because of Nvidia's reassertion of the belief that one day computers will be smart enough to program themselves, but simply because not everyone has the aptitude and necessary disposition to s

      • by narcc ( 412956 )

        If we spend even a fraction of the time on programming that we do on history, everyone would understand computer programming.

        Programming is easy. So easy that children can, and very often do, teach themselves. It does not take a special mind. It doesn't take rare talent or aptitude.

        I've seen the learning curve described as steep, but also very short. This is where formal education really makes a difference. On your own, you might give up in frustration. In a structured and supportive environment, you'

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      Very good.

      Also, books are *actually* better at "knowing history" than AI is at programming.

      Another perspective I enjoy from this idiot is that programmers should be taught by AI, ensuring that what few programmers do exist will not be qualified to judge AI results.

    • ... Kids should learn to mine coal?
      • That's so Nineteenth Century

        Today kids learn to mine cobalt.

        Because 'we' think people with funny languages don't feel the things we do.

        Otherwise we'd pay $2 more for a battery.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @11:01AM (#64269432)

      Also, kids shouldn't learn history, because books have been better at knowing history than people for about 6000 years now.

      Coding is not core knowledge, like reading, math, language, and history.

      Coding is a skill, like metal fabrication. Useful, but not everyone needs to learn it. Let the kids try it out, and if they are interested let them study it more.

      In short, coding is a shop class, not a core class.

      • by drhamad ( 868567 )
        That's the best explanation/comparison I've ever heard for this.
        It's not that coding isn't important, it's that it's important to only a subset of people. It's not core knowledge, it's shop class.
        • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @01:07PM (#64269858)
          To be clear, I don't think shop classes are only for those on the vocational track at school. I was on the college prep track and took all the shop classes for fun (don't we code because we like building things?), and the one I liked the best I took the advanced classes. Wood, metal and electrical shop allowed me to fix simple things around the house. Auto shop is more complicated given the transition to EVs.

          I'd include the old home economics classes as shop class too.

          I'd be happy if they made a shop class or two mandatory again, let the kids pick them.
      • So you say, but why?

        Why do people need math, language and history?

        Most people don't use anything beyond basic arithmetic. Why are they taught algebra, geometry, and a bunch of other stuff (logarithms, the quadratic formula and so on)? Why do people need to know history? Why do people need to know science, though that's missing from your core list.

        The answer to me is that people ought to have some kind of understanding of the world around them in order to be able to operate in it and make it work. So much no

      • Coding is putting logic math and thought into language. Yeah it's not a core class in and of itself, but the components that make up programming should be taught to everyone. These days basic application of logic is sorely lacking.

  • Amazing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:22AM (#64269158)

    Company heavily invested in selling chips to power AI suggests AI can do everything.

    AI can't really "code" outside of generating very small snippets of limited value.

    • Have you looked at their paper value? OMG, it looks larger than most countries and in a week you'll be able to buy Saudi Arabia with the stock.

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        Same can be said for Tesla...on the strength of their fabulous "self-driving" technology. The internet enables fraud on a massive scale.

        • Yeah, but do you dare to short?

          • by HBI ( 10338492 )

            When central banks are buying securities to prop up their value and won't let them fail?

            That would be idiocy.

        • Same can be said for Tesla...on the strength of their fabulous "self-driving" technology.

          The self-driving is just what makes headlines. Their real value is in the investments they've put into charging infrastructure (which they've opened up to other EV manufacturers), and their cars seem to be pretty popular too.

          Yeah, you can argue that Tesla's stock might be overvalued, but it's worth remembering we now live in a time where people also invest in cryptocurrency which is literally backed by nothing other than the belief that some greater fool is going to come along at some point and be willing

    • Re:Amazing (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Monday February 26, 2024 @10:25AM (#64269332) Homepage Journal

      > suggests AI can do everything

      NVDA employs many brilliant PhD computer scientists and physicists.

      Until that changes assume they are seeking to minimize competition.

      • Until that changes assume they are seeking to minimize competition.

        AMD enters the chat.

        Then the ROCM driver for your card gets deprecated, and it turns out you have the wrong kind of card anyway and the weirdly specific docker environment doesn't quite work.

        AMD leaves the chat.

    • Putting his motivations aside, I think he is right. Why should kids "learn to code"? Code what?

      Programming is a means to achieve some goal, not a valid pursuit in and of itself. People can learn to code in a particular language in a few weeks with some help. It's hardly more than typing, if you know basic logic (not basic computer logic, actual logic) and math.

      It makes as much sense as teaching them to weld, or to paint signs. In fact, teaching a physical skill is

    • Company heavily invested in selling chips to power AI suggests AI can do everything.

      I suggest we ask a different CEO just to check. Lets ask the Apple CEO ... Good thing we asked. It turns out the future of programming is really people using the Swift programming language.

  • college for all credit not an issue the bar for getting an loan is low!

    Like you just need an heart beat to get one and you can run it up very high and that loan is hard to get rid of in chapter 7 and 11

  • by nucrash ( 549705 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:38AM (#64269194)

    There are two types of businesses or people in the world.
    Those with more money than brains and those with more brains than money. nVidia's CEO might be considered the latter, but I believe with this phrase, he has put himself in the lot of the former.

    I don't need to know how to be a mechanic, but I need to know enough to do routine maintenance on my car.
    I don't need to know how to cook, but if I am going to eat responsible healthy portions of food, it does help.
    I don't need to know how to raise chickens, but it was helpful when the price of eggs went through the roof.
    I don't need to know how to do plumbing, but it helps that I have an understanding, especially when I am waiting several months to get a plumber to stop by.

    As mentioned elsewhere, as a programmer, I learned the valuable skill of how things should work and where to look when they don't work as expected.

    • As mentioned elsewhere, as a programmer, I learned the valuable skill of how things should work and where to look when they don't work as expected.

      I think the question is if, in 2040 (~ 15 years from now), AI is taking care of most "coding" tasks will there be jobs for "programmers" at the same rate there is today?

      If there won't be, then it probably makes sense for children today to not bother learning how to code and instead learn some other skill that may be more marketable when they are adults.

      • Actually, if this AI thing works out, I think there will be more jobs for "programmers" than there are today, and they will be focused on the more complex tasks like algorithm architecture and code review. If code becomes cheaper, more people will do coding.

      • Indeed. Then you only teach them enough programming such that it is useful in teaching logic, useful in more areas than just programming computers.

        Kind of like how when I was in school, they taught us a bit of foreign language, music, art, geography, civics, cooking, mechanics, typing, sports, etc.. To go along with the heavy doses of math, english, and history.

    • I don't know where you went to school, but mine taught nothing about plumbing (beyond that the ancient Romans were the first to utilize it on a large scale) and auto repair, unless you took those specific trade related electives in high school. Cooking (which was part of home economics) was technically an elective in middle school, but since you had to choose a minimum number of electives, it ended up being one of the more popular choices since it was considered to be easy. It's also one of those tasks th

      • by drnb ( 2434720 )

        I know absolutely nothing about raising chickens, beyond that my housing community's bylaws prohibit it.

        I learned, from the Discovery Channel, that gardens need to be moved just like crops need to be rotated to prevent soil depletion. And that you want to move the area the chicken eat and crap during the day to the area a future garden will be. Good to know for after the AI-induced collapse of civilization.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @11:14AM (#64269484)
      None of that changes the fact that coding is a shop class, not a core class. Yes shop classes can be very useful and practical, but they really should only be taken by those interested, not required for all.

      That said, I am a programmer, one that grew up with a mechanic father who had me watch or help whenever he fixed anything around the house or car. And took all the shop classes in HS. And is happy for all of it.

      But truthfully, some of my friends would hurt themselves with a screwdriver. They are the reason I have a first aid kit in the trunk of my car, I know they won't have one in their home. In shop class they would have contributed the torn bloody shirt the shop teacher hangs on the wall to remind future classes to pay attention. :-)
  • As the most expensive employee it is in the best interest of everyone to replace them with AI
  • by trybywrench ( 584843 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:45AM (#64269212)
    My kids are about to enter HS and have an interest in software engineering like their old man. I tell them to couple software engineering with something else, one of my kids wants to go into biology and the other astronomy. I tell them learn software dev in addition to another valuable skill because then you can apply your programming skills and differentiate yourself from the competition. I feel like only knowing development is worth less and less every year. Learning development coupled with a specialty where you can apply your development skills is where it's at IMO.

    As for AI, it's definitely another tool to have in your toolset but it's not a complete replacement for software engineering knowledge and skills. I use genAI regularly to produce code but it's like having a very eager, confident, but sometimes wrong jr dev working with you. You still need to check their work and hand fit where required.
    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @11:33AM (#64269550)
      A neighbor was a research chemist. He knew I was a software engineer. After knowing each other for years I mentioned I took freshman chemistry at the university for fun. We were only required to take freshman physics. He immediately asked me to apply to his company, or any chemistry oriented company for that matter. He said even one year of chemistry makes you highly desirable in the industry, you would be so much easier to work with than the most programmers.
  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:48AM (#64269226)
    to watch all these ultra wealthy ghouls argue over our futures. It's painfully obvious they're only interested in themselves. Microsoft et al just want cheap programmers. Nvidia wants to push LLMs because they depend heavily on their product. None of them have the children and/or society at large's interests in mind. But we're all just supposed to pretend they do.

    The inevitable cognitive dissonance created by what we're required to pretend (that our "betters" aren't preparing for a world without us) and what they say in public is almost Lovecraftian. Certainly men tossing around billions if not trillions of dollars while scheming to replace 1/3 of all employed people with machines has a bit of cosmic horror to it if only in the scale of it and the inability of humans to really understand numbers that big.
    • This is what you get when taxes are too low for decades.

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        True, although inarticulately presented. Taxes aren't too low for all, just for some. For decades the country has starved the middle class and neglected the poor to favor the rich; this is the result.

    • If you look at history, human society doesn't really have the best track record at being proactive enough to avoid self-inflicted disasters. We didn't establish the EPA until rivers were literally so polluted they were catching on fire. We almost hunted whales to extinction were it not for the commercialization of petroleum (which came with its own set of problems). Above-ground nuclear testing was a mistake. Lobotomies were a mistake. Thalidomide was a mistake. Not initially regulating the safety sta

  • He is not completely wrong... but AI is not the solution. Kids should learn about logic and spreadsheets... that is what 99% of the population needs. And to be able to run a small shop.

    • Kids should learn about [...] spreadsheets

      They should also learn to read by filling in government forms. No one needs fiction or even interesting nonfiction.

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.

        The topic is mandatory curriculum, no one would suggest that programming isn't at least as valuable an option as calculus, for example.

        As a mandatory subject, programming and reading are not comparable. Spreadsheets and reading aren't either, but at least learning spreadsheets is a more broadly applicable skill to learn.

        Mandatory programming education is questionable, he got that right even if his logic is entirely broken. Computer usage, though, make a great

        • I was being a sarcastic which was uncalled for. Sorry about that.

          My point is that that spreadsheets are, frankly, boring not something most kids are interested in. They're also not relevant to most kids lives as they have little need to tabulate and process numbers. It's difficult to teach something like that. By way of example, you need to be able to read and write in order to be able to do really boring stuff necessary to exist in society, like filling in forms.

          But it's taught by doming something rather m

    • And to be able to run a small shop.

      I'd say first some basic concepts of statistics, and then present the statistics of how likely it is that your new business will fail to become profitable. Also the concept of economy of scale, so you understand how larger established businesses get better deals on the things they're purchasing and how they can sell their products for less individual profit per item, putting your startup at a substantial competitive disadvantage. Of course, that might get too many students thinking about things like "late

    • I like to view coding as a shop class, not a core class. Let them try coding for a week or two in that computer literacy class, even if just scripting in that spreadsheet. Or maybe programming their calculators a little in some math or science class (a formula in physics class). Then if they are interested they can take the coding elective. Coding is vocational, like metal fabrication. Knowing a little or either being useful sometimes in life does not change that.
  • by Dan667 ( 564390 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @09:51AM (#64269238)
    I had a co-worker who is a Developer ask me for help. He could not get his code to work. After some troubleshooting I found the problem. On of the methods did not exist. He used AI to generate the code, but it had made up a function and he did not catch it. Now if someone who codes for a living cannot figure out why it does not work, what chance do regular people have.

    I've been waiting more than 20 years for my job to be sent overseas (still has not happened) and I guess I will probably be waiting till I retire for AI to replace my job. I see AI as helping me be more productive, but I doubt it will ever replace actual Developers. Kids need to learn to code.
    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      Make sure that no one is able to determine that the code does not work. That is the entire subtext here. AI owns the process and is self-supervising. That's what benefits AI companies the most so that's what an AI CEO says.

    • ... Now if someone who codes for a living cannot figure out why it does not work ...

      That happens all the time to great programmers. A bug is staring you in the face but you just don't see it. You invite a nearby colleague to take a look and they spot it in a couple of minutes. On another day you do the same for them when they are stuck staring at the screen.

  • If anything at all... I suggest that we let AI perform the minutiae and redundancies of various management positions before we have it replace the people who actually keep the company in business.

  • So Nvidia fired all of their educated workers because AI took all of that over and does a better job?

  • This one-size-fits-all mindset has got to go. There absolutely should be a push to get the very young to code.

    But discover the ones who like it, then let the rest off the hook.

    God forbid we have separate curricula.
  • The typical mistake I feel like people make when thinking that AI is going to replace programming is thinking all programmers do is write code. Once a programmer learns how to code generically, they can write code in any language, it is not hard. The hard part is figuring out what a program is supposed to do. Knowing how to write requirements, understanding logical mathematics and problem solving. Learn to model a program, not just code it. This is different from "biology, education, manufacturing, or f

  • ...between hand-turned code programmed by a teenager who had in-depth knowledge of standards and testing procedures, or the very best code produced by a statistics-driven LLM AI, I'll take the teenager's code every time.

    AI code is, feankly, rubbish, and it can never be better than rubbish because it's based on the probability of text appearing together and not on any actual understanding of either the problem space or the language.

    In fact, it's worse than that. Because most of the code on the Internet has a

  • Quite literally!

    Kids should not learn to code?
    As if A.I. is perfect or ever would be.
    In fact - more than EVER should kids absolutely learn how to code.

    We're in deep trouble with Generation Alpha, they've grown up with a smartphone thumb muscle memory, they don't know anything else than being a consumer of content and products.

    They should get creative and have fun coding, and if they don't - we'll have a serious lack of skilled minds to see what really goes on behind the mystery world of programs, apps and

  • Fuck Nvidia. They have totally turned into a greed factory. I remember back in the day laughing at AMD for their slow CPU's. Now all my rigs are totally AMD. When Nvidia killed off SLI on the lower tier stuff, I knew then that would be the last time they got any money from me.

    This AI poison has sunk deep into society so quickly that I really don't want to be around when it plays out.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. Just for a dollar more, they are willing to tell any and all lies. Repulsive.

      Now, kids should not learn to code, because coding is not a skill most pople need. But most coding, except maybe at the most simple level and when occasional catastrophic failures do not matter, will be done by humans for the foreseeable future.

      • will be done by humans for the foreseeable future.

        Just a lot fewer of them. Which is his point.

        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          will be done by humans for the foreseeable future.

          Just a lot fewer of them. Which is his point.

          That was inevitable. And it will _not_ happen because of AI. His point is insightless crap. The reason fewer humans will write code is simply that the requirements for writing code that actually survives being used in the wild are going massively up and that means a lot less can do it. AI will just become even more outclassed.

    • Unreal engine runs like absolute ass on budget AMD GPUs, though. There's a lot of folks on YouTube shilling for AMD's stuff, but the reality is that their drivers aren't the best and game glitches are pretty common.

      Now don't get me wrong, Nvidia absolutely is taking advantage of their position in the marketplace to squeeze every last dollar out of it that they can. But there's a reason they're presently the most popular GPU manufacturer on Steam [steampowered.com], and that's because if you'd rather game than curse at your

  • by avandesande ( 143899 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @10:43AM (#64269386) Journal
    Remember in the 90s how software was all going to be drag-and-drop so you didn't need a software engineer? We don't even have that yet and we are going to jump to AI programming everything...
  • Talent is real (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MpVpRb ( 1423381 ) on Monday February 26, 2024 @11:03AM (#64269446)

    People who have talent in designing software systems should learn to code
    It's kinda like machining. In order to be a good CNC machinist, it helps a lot to be a good manual machinist
    I'm optimistic that future AI tools will allow people to build better software, but designing complex systems is hard and will require talented and trained minds to work with the tools

    The myth persists that complex, reliable software can be produced using a specification written in English or some other natural language. All this does is change the programming language from one suited to the task into one that fits poorly.

  • He is a optimist, where everything works as expected, there are no errors, no corruption, no crashes, no weird data, no bugs (real bugs, animals) in the systems

    When everything fails in weird ways, you will need a human, with lot of knowledge to dig depth and debug what is going on... and you will not have knowledge people if the "AI" is doing everything.

    All he wants is to push the AI and sell more GPU... for a higher price, of course! even if it will doom the world...

    • I'm sure they'll need human coders, but less and less as we are replaced entirely from the day to day work. That's the point. New devs won't have jobs.

  • All you people saying "look, it's been a year since OpenAI and still it's not a great coder" are missing the point entirely.

    In 10 years, it will be so close to perfect that the number of programmers required will decline by at least half of it is right now because us devs won't need to be in the loop at all. All those new junior coders will have place to go.

  • Isn't that akin to suggesting kids don't need to learn math, because well... the computer can do all that. LOL

    Along with math, programming offers quite a bit, including problem solving skills, reasoning etc. I personally think programming is more fun.

    I'll take it a step further with cursive writing or with no-writing classes, you take away learning potential that is more effective by involving different parts of the brain.

    It's as if there's an intent to dumb down society so that we can't (or won't) think

  • English is not a precise language. Programming needs to be precise. AI may translate English into something precise, but it may not be what you had in mind. So, start with LEGO Mindstorms. If you can AI the shit out of those, then we can talk about real programming.
  • Of course the CEO of a company who produces chips that AI models run on is going to suggest people rely on their chips instead of learning how to do it themselves.

    Writing code with AI is limited to simple programs at the moment, but I'm sure it will improve quite quickly where complex programs can be generated efficiently in the next few years. With that said, understanding how that code works is still important and at the very least basic understanding should be a requirement in education.

  • Even if you assume that AI will be able to spit out perfect code with a simple prompt in the near future, I think it's still a good idea for most students to have a basic working knowledge of coding. That doesn't mean becoming able to develop commercial software, but gaining a basic understanding what's happening behind the scenes with software is helpful in the same way understanding the basics of electricity is helpful even if you are never going to work as a EE or electrician, or understanding how an int

  • AI is a program, idiots.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • How else will children survive in this new world economy that revolves around stone buildings???

"An organization dries up if you don't challenge it with growth." -- Mark Shepherd, former President and CEO of Texas Instruments

Working...