This is a pervasive problem, one of the prime examples of why knowing the basics about algorithms and programming is a great skill to have.
Many people do not think about whether they can automate certain things. Even if you tell them too, they will often not have the right mindset for it and be unable to recognize that something is automatable.
This is not the fault of those people, it’s a fault of education. Automation is not intuitive, it’s not something humans understand instinctively. To know what works and what doesn’t, to know what’s possible, people need to learn the basics about how to code. (Maybe some will even be able to do some of it themselves, while others can at least ask around for an actual implementation.)
No, it’s not the solution to the failing education system in the US. No, it’s not the best thing since sliced bread. It’s not the savior. What it is, though, is just a good idea.
> This is not the fault of those people, it’s a fault of education. Automation is not intuitive, it’s not something humans understand instinctively.
Actually, I think a large number of people who are good programmers figured out automation on their own, meaning the education system is almost entirely useless when it comes to this. We all have our own stories for this moment of enlightenment - mine was writing TI calculator programs to "automate" problem sovling in middle school algebra.
Well, yes, "people who are good programmers". The point here is though that the others should get an idea about this. There will always be people who don;t understand the easiest of procedures, but I am sure a large number of people would understand automation if the idea was given to them (at an early age).
Probably would they then think about it when the need arrises, and maybe come up with some creative solutions. If we just leave it to the natural good programmers, the solutions may be better, but the number will be lower.
That’s not really what I meant. Most people do not know what algorithms are in the first place. That’s what you have to teach. You would tell them that some of the most common tasks are searching and sorting, for example, and then show different ways of doing it. It’s not about picking out the best algorithm, it’s about showing which types of problems are usually solved with algorithms and also explaining some of them, maybe also in a second step how those algorithms can be combined to solve more practical and complex problems.
That way people learn what’s possible. But you are of course right, in most cases even a naive implementation is better than manual labor.
Many people do not think about whether they can automate certain things. Even if you tell them too, they will often not have the right mindset for it and be unable to recognize that something is automatable.
This is not the fault of those people, it’s a fault of education. Automation is not intuitive, it’s not something humans understand instinctively. To know what works and what doesn’t, to know what’s possible, people need to learn the basics about how to code. (Maybe some will even be able to do some of it themselves, while others can at least ask around for an actual implementation.)
No, it’s not the solution to the failing education system in the US. No, it’s not the best thing since sliced bread. It’s not the savior. What it is, though, is just a good idea.