Comment by josephg
12 days ago
I graduated about 15 years ago. In that time, I’ve formed the opposite opinion. My degree - the piece of paper - has been mostly useless. But the ways of thinking I learned at university have been invaluable. That and the friends I made along the way.
I’ve worked with plenty of self taught programmers over the years. Lots of smart people. But there’s always blind spots in how they approach problems. Many fixate on tools and approaches without really seeing how those tools fit into a wider ecosystem. Some just have no idea how to make software reliable.
I’m sure this stuff can be learned. But there is a certain kind of deep, slow understanding you just don’t get from watching back-to-back 15 minute YouTube videos on a topic.
>I’ve worked with plenty of self taught programmers over the years. Lots of smart people. But there’s always blind spots in how they approach problems.
I've worked with PhDs on projects (I'm self-taught), and those guys absolutely have blind spots in how they approach problems, plenty of them. Everyone does. What we produce together is better because our blind spots don't typically overlap. I know their weaknesses, and they know mine. I've also worked with college grads that overthink everything to the point they made an over-abstracted mess. YMMV.
>you just don’t get from watching back-to-back 15 minute YouTube videos on a topic.
This is not "self taught". I mean maybe it's one kind of modern-ish concept of "self taught" in an internet comment forum, but it really isn't. I watch a ton of sailing videos all day long, but I've never been on a sailboat, nor do I think I know how to sail. Everyone competent has to pay their dues and learn hard lessons the hard way before they get good at anything, even the PhDs.
I think it depends on how they were self taught. If they just went through a few tutorials on YouTube and learned how to make a CRUD app using the shiny tool of the week, then sure. (I acknowledge this is a reduction in self-teaching — I myself am self-taught).
But if they actually spent time trying to learn architecture and how to build stuff well, either by reading books or via good mentorship on the job, then they can often be better than the folks who went to school. Sometimes even they don't know how to make software reliable.
I'm firmly in the middle. Out of the 6 engineers I work with on a daily basis (including my CTO), only one of us has a degree in CS, and he's not the one in an architecture role.
I do agree that learning how to think and learn is its own valuable skill set, and many folks learn how to do that in different ways.
> But if they actually spent time trying to learn architecture and how to build stuff well, either by reading books or via good mentorship on the job, then they can often be better than the folks who went to school.
Yeah I just haven’t seen this happen. I’ve seen plenty of people graduate who were pretty useless. But … I think every self taught programmer I’ve worked with had meaningful gaps in their knowledge.
They’d spend a week in JavaScript to save them from 5 minutes with C or bash. Or they’d write incredibly slow code because they didn’t know the appropriate algorithms and data structures. They wouldn’t know how to profile their program to learn where the time is being spent. (Or that that’s even a thing). Some would have terrible intuitions around how the computer actually runs a program, so they can’t guess what would be fast or slow. I’ve seen wild abstractions to work around misunderstandings of the operating system. Hundreds of lines to deal with a case that can’t actually ever happen, or because someone missed the memo on a syscall that solves their exact problem. There’s also hairball nests of code because someone doesn’t know what a state machine is. Or how to factorise their problem in other ways. One guy I worked with thought the react team invented functional programming. Someone else doesn’t understand how you could write programs without OO inheritance. And I’ve seen so many bugs. Months of bugs, that could be prevented with the right design and tests.
I’ve worked with incredibly smart self taught programmers. Some of the smartest people I’ve ever worked with. But the thing about blind spots is you don’t know you have them. You say you’re self taught, and self taught people can be better than people who went to school. In limited domains, yeah. Smart matters a lot. But you don’t know what you don’t know. You don’t know what you missed out on. And you don’t know what problems in the workplace you could have easily solved if you knew how.
Yeah, I agree, but not knowing what you don't know applies to almost everyone in every skill, not just programming. I acknowledge I have gaps in my knowledge. But it's because of those gaps that I am always trying to supplement my knowledge by studying different data structures, different patterns for solving problems, different algorithms. I don't aim for complete mastery. I aim for basically "what can I add to my bag of problem solving tools." I concede that because the barrier to entry is low, stories similar to your anecdotes are probably quite common in most self-taught programmers. I think this just speaks to the necessity of rigor during the interview process. Like, does the candidate just know how to build features, or do they know how to design fail-proof systems?
Also, to clarify, I'm not arguing that self-taught vs CS grad is mutually exclusive to smart/not smart. There are plenty of not-smart self-taught engineers and plenty of smart grads.
> In limited domains
I'd argue that many, if not most, teams operate in limited domains.
1 reply →
I haven't heard of self taught programmers binging 15 minute YT videos. I can't recall the last time I did myself.. aside from conference talks and such its probably been at least 5 years since I watched something explaining things in the realm of programming.
Am I an outlier or am I missing something here?