Code Like a Computer Share This:





I know the women on this panel did not choose the title. And they appear to be intelligent and accomplished. But they're going about this the wrong way.



"When you make computer science about creative problem-solving, when you make it social, when it's not scary and intimidating, and when you show people who look like real human beings rather than people who've been stuck in a basement ... coding," more girls will be attracted to it, said Klawe.

Charming. There's nothing quite like seeing a panel who are discussing prejudice and stereotypes, perpetuating yet another stereotype -- "stuck in a basement." I'm flabbergasted that someone sharing a panel with black women could get away with implying others are not "like real human beings"; it wasn't very many decades ago that that calumny was hurled at blacks. Strike Maria Klawe off my list of persons whose opinions deserve respect.



Look, folks, here is your problem: you're trying to change computer science education in the direction of "coding like a girl." There is no "code like a girl." There also is no "code like a guy." To be successful in computer science, you have to code like a computer.



You have to learn to "think" the way the computer does -- realizing of course that computers don't think. As



People who do this well sometimes experience the transcendent moment when your head is so totally into the problem, when your consciousness is totally suffused with the program structures and the data structures and the logic of the problem that you're solving, that you seem to become one with the machine. You know that this change will have that effect; that this structure will be correctly ordered; that that boundary condition has been satisfied. (Wendy knows the signs that I'm in that zone, and knows not to interrupt me then, because the last thing you want is to break that concentration and lose that perfect understanding. It comes all too rarely.)



I don't know that it's a genetic thing. I've met women who "get it," and the vast majority of men do not. And



But even then, there is no "code like a girl." (And isn't that a bit demeaning, along the lines of "throw like a girl"?) If you can't code like a computer, you're in the wrong profession.



__________

* If you don't understand the importance of Back to category overview Back to news overview Older News Newer News



Printer Friendly Brad - Tuesday 10 March 2015 - 12:57:27 - Permalink I really, really need to stop following certain links; it's not good for my blood pressure. From Fred Reed I learned of this article in the Harvard Gazette, "Code like a girl" I know the women on this panel did not choose the title. And they appear to be intelligent and accomplished. But they're going about this the wrong way.Charming. There's nothing quite like seeing a panel who are discussing prejudice and stereotypes, perpetuating yet another stereotype -- "stuck in a basement." I'm flabbergasted that someone sharing a panel with black women could get away with implying others are not "like real human beings"; it wasn't very many decades ago that that calumny was hurled at blacks. Strike Maria Klawe off my list of persons whose opinions deserve respect.Look, folks, here is your problem: you're trying to change computer science education in the direction of "coding like a girl." There is no "code like a girl." There also is no "code like a guy." To be successful in computer science, you have to code like a computer.You have to learn to "think" the way the computer does -- realizing of course that computers don't think. As Kate Paulk correctly observed, computers are "nothing more than very fast morons." ("High speed idiots," we called them in college.) You have to get your head into their space. There is no meeting halfway. You have to become ruthlessly literal, because a machine has no judgment; you have to pay attention to a myriad of details.*People who do this well sometimes experience the transcendent moment when your head is so totally into the problem, when your consciousness is totally suffused with the program structures and the data structures and the logic of the problem that you're solving, that you seem to become one with the machine. You know that this change will have that effect; that this structure will be correctly ordered; that that boundary condition has been satisfied. (Wendy knows the signs that I'm in that zone, and knows not to interrupt me then, because the last thing you want is to break that concentration and lose that perfect understanding. It comes all too rarely.)I don't know that it's a genetic thing. I've met women who "get it," and the vast majority of men do not. And as I've commented before , there's plenty of work for those who do not -- those who are simply competent programmers, who can translate human instructions into machine instructions without totally submerging themselves in the problem.But even then, there is no "code like a girl." (And isn't that a bit demeaning, along the lines of "throw like a girl"?) If you can't code like a computer, you're in the wrong profession.__________* If you don't understand the importance of putting an elephant in Cairo , you're not yet thinking like a computer.