Don't Have Programming Skills? Master Software Instead

It’s often reported in the news or media, that somehow “us” non-software programmers are in deep trouble, and us average plebs that don’t have software programming skills will become obsolete, redundant, or undesirable in the not so distant future.

This broad paradigm shift was popularized, and has become the narrative by various media outlets, or really the mainstream in such a way that it’s just so convincing of an argument that you would believe it to be true. Some of its factually driven with fancy or elaborate graphs and charts that project the average median income of a software programmer versus every other professional, or the numerous successes of newly minted multi-millionaires with some background in coding.

Basically, a software programmer will become successful, or rich by default says the usual media “pundit” or “expert.” Though if you ask anyone with programming skills, they think there’s some truth to the narrative, and they’ll often justify why they’re more successful or better equipped than the rest of us professionals. And sure, software programming is a valuable skillset, and they’re certainly riding one of the biggest trends of the 21st Century.

But then… I thought about it, and I think they’re wrong. Now, before you accuse me of being some myopic moron that hates programmers/coders, think again. I’m not saying that software programming isn’t necessarily valuable, but maybe we’re over-valuing software programming and diminishing the value of every other profession in the process. In the end, not everyone can write lines of code, nor will everyone start writing lines of code, as if it’s a new language that’s widely accepted like English or Spanish for that matter.

Does everyone need to write lines of code to be considered moderately or even decently successful? I don’t think, or really, I don’t buy into the belief that everyone needs to develop programming skills, but they sure need to overcompensate in other areas, so they’re still relevant or employable, or have some discernible advantage in the not so distant future.

Follow me on social media!

Master software or write lines of code… you choose

If you can’t write software then your other option is to become a power user of software. Me personally, I can’t write lines of code worth jack, but I do know how to use various software to amplify my output, which is almost as good if not better than being just a programmer.

Now, before you jump onto your soap box and criticize me in MySQL or JavaScript with an expletive, just hear me out for a second. You guys write software for an end-user, and in reality, the person who adopts the use of software could be just as productive as the man or women who writes endless lines of code.

Writing software is a profession unto itself, and quite frankly, the person who writes lines of code has opted for a very specific vocation. It’s a specialization that eventually ties into every other specialization where software is designed to work in conjunction with various other professions rather than some all-encompassing skill that makes all other skills irrelevant or useless.

For example, the architect or engineer is never going to get replaced by a software program, okay? It’s just never going to happen, because engineering is an applied skillset that uses software to produce an output, i.e. the ability to design 3D-renderings of objects whether it involves structural, basic materials, or various other consumer or industrial products. Software and automation enhance the workflow or skillset of other professions, but they’re not a replacement for actual human beings that have to work with the new automations, and tools that get introduced.

No matter how advanced artificial intelligence becomes, some human being has to use the new automation intelligently, or within the context of their profession. With AutoCAD, Adobe Illustrator, and so many other forms of productivity software, there’s plenty of software to just learn. AI is useless without someone optimizing the automations to work effectively within their vocation and field. And, with fields that require so much applied ingenuity and creativity, it’s not some replicable task some humanoid AI can simply work with, and become better at, as if it’s some chess match or something.

It just doesn’t work like that, and no matter how many times some crazy journalist buys into the myth, the reality of software and how it interacts with non-programmers is so obnoxiously miss-reported, it makes me wonder if journalists have ever attempted the use of software when it’s not strictly tied to Microsoft Word, and WordPress. No offense journalists, but if you think every work function gets enhanced and automated away with some new technology introduction out of some lab, or company, you’ve been missing the entire narrative of software over the past decade.

Programmers create valuable products that enhances productivity, and each automation they’ve ever created becomes too limiting of a sandbox for various creative professions that they’ve instead opted to automate what can be automated effectively, as opposed to automating everything. I.E., software that’s designed to automate very specific tasks can be used by the end-user to free up time, so they can focus on other productive tasks, while the machine hums along and continues to work at its robotic pace.

Sort of like, the machine is there to be used, and those who are really good users of the machine have just as much of a competitive advantage as those who are designing the machines. You probably won’t create a software product in your entire lifetime, but if you become proficient at using various forms of software, you’re pretty much on a path to becoming this walking/talking cyborg.

Follow me on social media!

If you’re good at integrating with various machines, or really computer functions, aka software you’re a humanoid computer.  

There have been countless sci-fi thrillers that have come up with ways to beat the organic human, but not even the Hollywood doomsday theorists have come up with a solid enough case for defeating cyborgs with pure AI robots. If you’re saying a human can simply enter the machine, or achieves some form of symbiosis with the machine (already occurring) well then… how does the robot defeat a robot with an organic brain stuck on top? It just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, just like the end of the world pumpers out of Hollywood have yet to prove successful with their theories (thank goodness).  

There’s an argument around the topic of software that either leads to fatalism, or escapism. The fatalism comes from the group of people who have no software literacy, i.e. they don’t purchase software licenses ever, and so they just sit around with their thumbs up their butts waiting until they really do become irrelevant. Whereas the escapists believe the robots will takeover, so they’re busy working on AI, so they’re the next overlords with AI armies running around, which they own the patents and licenses to.

I’m dead serious, I’ve run into both types of people in my various walks of life. And ironically, I think both types of people are delusional. By the time we ever create a sentient AI, we’ve probably developed a way to enter the machine, or create a machinima ghost-like function of ourselves, or really integrated with computers to a point where the threat of sentient-AI is almost like college humor. Oh, yeah there’s a robot that can talk and think, and walk like us, but we’re every bit as much machine as the machine turned human being.

Really, if you think technology can advance to a point where machines can become every much like a human being, what about the opposing corollary where the human being is also a machine, as well?

Both are likely to occur, and it’s why every futurist that’s jumped on the machine beating humans, or humans beating the machine sound ridiculous. It’s not that humans are necessarily going to be humans anymore, but rather… the interface for how we interact with the machine will morph to a point where human beings unify with the semiconductor chip, or quantum chip, or whatever input/output circuitry that best defines the “machine” at some future point.

It’s why I’m not positioning myself for a Hollywood narrative, but rather an actual narrative for where things are likely to be in the next five, ten, thirty years. The idea that a robot is going to replace me sounds every bit as ridiculous, because I’m a power-user of the machine itself, and so I’m already replacing every function of my existence that can be replicated by a machine, anyway. This only frees up my time, so I can work on other activities that cannot be replicated by a machine, and so… the machine is like a companion, which is where software adoption plays a big role over the trajectory of my work career, but also your career too.

The more you can perfect the adoption of software into your work routine, the more machine-like you sort of become. It’s where people lose sight track of whether that was a human being that did xyz, or whether it was the machine, but in reality, it’s really a combination of both.

The best path forward

Hence, the real path forward is either one of two things. Either you’re the creator of software, or you’re just really good at using various forms of software. You don’t necessarily need to create a software program, because chances are… a licensed version of whatever capabilities you’re looking for will eventually hit the market. And just like that, you can leverage the software without having the proprietary advantages of being the programmer, because if you pay some novel fee to some other genius programmer/inventor, you suddenly gain the capabilities of that software without having had to put in the thousands of hours needed to build the software.

Hence, there’s no scenario in which there’s a ruler of all, but rather the “Master of Software” is every bit as powerful as the man “Writing the Software,” and it’s why you’ve got to choose between either the mastery of software or becoming the inventor of software.

For those who miss the boat on being either of the two, you’re definitely screwed. There’s no future in which the computer doesn’t exist. It’s just a future of whether you choose to co-exist with the computer, or you become outwitted by another power user of the computer, or the computer turns you into the slave of the computer.

Of those menu options, I chose the co-existence route, because I don’t see how I can keep up with the overlord of software or some humanoid-AI (in the distant future), if I miss the boat on co-existentialism.

Best of luck,

Follow me on social media!