* John F. Kennedy, who (allegedly) smoked pot to help him focus.
* Benjamin Franklin
* Thomas Edison
* Leonardo da Vinci
* Alexander Graham Bell
* Orville and Wilber Wright
* Sir Isaac Newton
* Albert Einstein
Here is the original article: https://medium.com/@hardaway/why-women-shouldnt-code-82205165e64a
Firstly, the title is attention grabbing nonsense. The article is about why women (girls) should not be forced to learn to code at school.
There are a some good points in the article. In general, today, women are less interested in software careers, and software degrees than men are. That’s a fact.
Companies like to promote from within, but many (male) software engineers make lousy managers and directors. Myself included. So finding good software engineering managers is hard. That’s a fact. Imagine Sheldon Cooper managing a team of 10 Sheldon Coopers. What a nightmare. The best managers I ever had as a software engineer were all women. The others were all men. So I would like to see college and vocational courses just for Engineering Management. That might be a role that attracts more women than men. If so, great.
I don’t agree that women shouldn’t code. I don’t agree that girls should not be required to learn coding at school – and here is why. At school we learn Art, and Music, and History, and Sports. How many of us become professional artists, musicians, historians, or athletes? Almost none of us, but that’s not why we learn them.Learning the about those subject enriches us and gives us context. So much of our world today is driven by and dependent on computers, that a basic understanding of how they are controlled seems, to me, to be more important than knowing who won the Battle of Antietam and when.
If teaching girls to code results in more female software engineers, that’s great, if it doesn’t, that’s ok too, because they know more about the world than they did before.
Under an Apache License on GitHub.
Seems that RedHat’s Truth Happens video http://www.redhat.com/v/mov/TruthHappens.mov needs another line:
First they ignore you…
Then they laugh at you…
Then they fight you…
Then you win.
And then they realize you had the right idea all along and adopt your practices for themselves.
Dan Woods put out a nice piece yesterday on his Forbes blog titled “Lessons From The First Wave Of Hadoop Adoption“.
I agree with him that the insights and advantages of Big Data solutions need to be described in ways other than technology. I’m going to add on to his insights.
1. It’s about more than big data. It’s a new platform.
Yes, it is a new platform. That means it’s different than the old ones. The fact that you can do some things cheaper than you could before is not the main idea. A bigger story is that some things that were economically not possible before, now are. But the main idea is that this is a new platform, with new capabilities, that needs to fit into your existing data architecture.
2. Don’t get rid of your data warehouse
I completely agree. Big Data technology is a new tool with new characteristics. Using it to replace a Data Warehouse technology that is finely tuned for that use case is not a great idea. Don’t listen to the “Hadoop will replace every database within x years” crowd. No database has managed to replace every database. No database ever will because the variety of the use cases is too large.
3. Think about your data supply chain
Since a Big Data system needs to fit in with everything you currently have and operate, integration is a significant priority. Understand that with Big Data you can build a Big Silo, but a Big Silo is as bad as a small silo (just a lot bigger). You should not be required to pump all your data from every system into Hadoop to get value from it. Design you data architecture carefully, the implications and fallout of getting it right or wrong are significant.
4. It’s complicated
Yes it is. It’s also not cheap to do it well. Sure you can download a lot of open source software and prototype or prove your ideas without a lot of upfront outlay. But putting it into production is a production. Expect that.
“Dixon’s Union of the State idea gives the Data Lake idea a positive mission besides storing more data for less money,”
“Providing the equivalent of a rewind, pause, forward remote control on the state of your business makes it affordable to answer many questions that are currently too expensive to tackle. Remember, you don’t have to implement this vision for all data for it to provide a new platform to answer difficult questions with minimal effort.”
- Let the application store it’s current state in a relational or No-SQL repository. Don’t affect the operation of the operational system.
- Log all events and state changes that occur within the application. This is the tricky part unless it is an in-house application. It would be best if these events and state changes were logged in real time, but this is sometimes not ideal. Maybe SalesForces or SugarCRM will offer this level of logging as a feature. Dump this data into a Data Lake using a suitable storage and processing technology such as Hadoop.
- Provide the ability to rewind the state of any and all attributes by parallel processing of the logs.
- Provide the facilities listed above using technologies appropriate of each use case (using the rewind capability).
The plumbing and architecture for this is not simple and Dan Woods points out that there are databases like Datomic that provide capabilities for storing and querying state over time. But a solution based on a Data Lake has the same price, scalability, and architectural attributes as other big data systems.
These are my thoughts on a recent Dan Woods (Forbes) post titled “Will Companies Ever Move Their Crown Jewels to Amazon Web Services?“.
My short answer is yes, because otherwise Jeff Bezos (the Founder of Amazon) has failed. As of today Bezos is worth $28.8 bn and #16 on Forbes list of powerful people. I’m guessing he’s the kind of guy who doesn’t like to fail.
Jeff Bezos explains his vision in this 10 year old TED talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation
He spends the first 7 minutes comparing the Internet bubble to the California gold rush and then moves onto an analogy comparing the internet today with the electricity industry 100 years ago.
I admire the time and energy he spends on his analogies. He looked into different ones and compared them to find the best one. Good analogies are hard to find. The best ones sound obvious when you hear them but can hard to find. The Bee Keeker analogy for open source software took me months of iterations based on years of experience to come up with. It sounds fairly obvious when you hear it, but there was no analogy before it to help understand the model.
If an analogy is good enough will allow you to infer additional knowledge. If you follow Bezos’ electricity analogy, and look at history you can draw additional insights. Looking at the history of electricity adoption, we can draw inferences about the adoption of cloud computing (with some generalizations) :
- Before the introduction of electricity supply as a commodity service, any large company needing electricity had its own electricity generators.
- Before the introduction of cloud-based computing with utility pricing, any large company needing computing had its own data center.
- Who were the first people to join the electricity grid? Small companies and residences without prior electrical supply.
- Who were the first people to use cloud computing? Small companies and individuals without data centers.
- Who were the last people to join the electricity grid? Large companies with their own power sources.
- Who will be the last people to migrate to cloud computing? Large companies with their own data centers.
Looking in the press you can see that the majority of the anti-cloud talk comes from larger enterprises.
However, most companies that have started in the last five years are evolving cloud-based infrastructures. As a start-up you typically have desktop-based applications for accounting, HR, CRM etc. As you grow it makes sense to move to hosted solutions like Net Suite, SalesForce, SugarCRM etc. As you add more and more hosted solutions the cost and headache of installing and maintaining on-premise solutions looks less and less attractive.
So today’s generation of small comanies, which will become large companies in the future, have four classes of applications:
- Domain-specific desktop applications
- Generic applications with small scale usage (e.g. project planning)
- Generic applications that will grow and become cloud based (payroll, CRM, or accounting in a small company)
- Cloud-based applications
If companies, as Dan suggests, are using services other than Amazon for critical applications, then Amazon is failing in its mission due to operational issues. Jeff Bezos is not likely to let that continue for long.