Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "What Makes A Great Developer" video.

@apl1568 there is always a one in a million genius who does not need formal.structure to get systematically educated. But you'rw not Carmack. And you're not me. You cannot become an engineer without someone holding your hands.throughout your education.
4
 @Salantor Travis is a perfect example. 99% of what he's saying is an utter nonsense.
3
Travis is a grifter selling an illusion that self-taughts and bootcamp graduates have a chance to become engineers. Spoiler alert: they don't.
2
Teavis is a grifter selling courses to lazy people who want a shortcut into engineering. Noting positive about that, just spreading code-monkeyinsm which already hurted this industry.
1
@apl1568 in many countries the very title "engineer" is legally defined. Sadly, not for the software engineers. Self-taughts are incompetent and their productivity is negative. The sooner this industry is regulated properly, the better, we must get rid of all the wrong people. Those who work ad "engineers" are impostors and will never become real worthy engineers.
1
@apl1568 self-taughts may be employed as "engineers", but they are in no way anywhere close to real engineers.
1
@amisco333 found a butt-hurt code monkey
1
@amisco333 code monkey is offended? Good.
1
@Dryblack1 anyone with a proper STEM degree is not self-taught, they already had formal efucation and know how to learn.
1
@Dryblack1 education is way more.than just a pile of information. I never met self-taughts who had a systematic gap-free understanding. It only comes with structured learning.
1
@Dryblack1 there are some schools that provide systematic tuition. Like, a dozen of them in the whole world. While universities (good ones) do it as a norm. The chasm between a person with a STEM degree and someone who never had a proper education is always huge and impossible to cross for the later.
1
@Dryblack1 It really shows that you never had a formal education. Your reading comprehension is particularly poor. Let me explain it to you once again, slowly: people who never had any STEM education have no idea how to learn. You're a perfect example, so I recommend you to reflect on your failings to understand what I mean. Only learning one of the STEM subjects in a formal, structured way gives you a framework for learning anything else. You must comprehend at least one subject systematically before you can do it on your own with any other subject. You missed that part, and now you have no idea how to make a system out of any pile of knowledge. Your understanding of the subject that you believe you're proficient in is full of gaps and does not form a solid system. This is the common feature of all self-taughts I ever met, and I've seen a lot of them.
1
@Dryblack1 you clearly have reading comprehension issues.
1
@Dryblack1 you failed to comprehend that only a hard STEM education gives you a structure to learn anything systematically on your own.
1
@Dryblack1 again, education is much more than a pile of information. It is a structure as well - something that you missed completeky, ended up with a very superficial and patchy understanding. You're not an engineer and will never become one. I've been in this industry for over thirty years. Never once I met a self-taught who was even barely adequate. All the good engineers always had a STEM or at the very least philosophy or linguistics backgrounds. All had degrees. And, by the way, I never paid a penny for my Soviet degree.
1
@Dryblack1 again, you very evidently missed all of the education. If you have no idea what a systematic knowledge is and how it is different from that patchy pile of factoids you confuse for knowledge, you're hopeless.
1
@Dryblack1 the difference between the educated and uneducated people is a systematic gap-free knowledge. Since we're talking about CS/SE, let's consider specific examples. Do you understand the fundamental importance of the Kolmogorov complexity? Do you understand the fundamental implications of Turing-completeness and how you can vastly improve the quality of your designs by avoiding it? Do you know the value of formal proofs, and can you automate them? If the answer to any of these is negative, it is an indication of how patchy your knowledge is and that it is just a house of cards, not a connected system where every piece of knowledge is linked to the other, and you can construct everything from.the first principles.
1
@Dryblack1 you seem to have no idea whatsoever of what fundamental knowledge is. Yes, it is absolutely supposed to be gap-free, and if it is not, it is useless. You won't be able to reconstruct anything else from the first principles if your fundamental base is patchy. I feel this discussion is hopeless - you don't even understand the language I'm using, yet you still somehow believe you're an engineer. Once again, the simple fundamental things I mentioned are unlikely to be taught directly. Yet you'd know them, dearly, closely, if you had a fundamental, gap-free base knowledge. You don't. You treat information as a pile of unrelated pieces. You believe you can just "look up" whatever you need at the moment. It's a very naive view, typical for the uneducated people who have no idea of what knowledge really is. Think of my examples again. You don't know any of the things I mentioned. And it means you're uneducated and you're not an engineer. You cannot just look them up - they must have been the very basis of your entire knowledge. You believe you know something (like, some programming languages, maybe), yet without the things I mentioned you don't really know anything. You have a pile of unrelated factoids.
1
@Dryblack1 you have reading comprehension issues. I provided the evidence, but you lack the knowledge to understand it. Let me repeat it slowly: a properly, systematically educated engineer can reconstruct the entire domain from the first principles. Due to a systematic, gap free fundamental comprehension. Can you rebuild from scratch any software.or.hardware tool you're using? Do you understand it from the ground up, the entire stack of abstractions? If the answer is "no" - you're not an engineer. A proper engineer can do it, if given enough time.
1
@Dryblack1 you're truly hopeless, but it is understandable, of course you cannot comprehend the depth of knowledge you do not possess. Again. An engineer can recreate everything from the first principles. Without an access to any information. With only the fundamental knowledge. And people who never had a proper deep education will never be able to identify and systematise this fundamental knowledge, even having an access to all the information in the world. They were not taught the *method*.
1
@johnharmon6119 I bet you're a Dunning-Kruger sufferer. Your assessment of your own level of competence is, most likely, very much above the real level. And this is another thing that lack of formal education does - you simply have no framework for even detecting the presence of knowledge gaps.
1