Yesterday, I saw such remarks on the Internet, which was quite interesting. as follows:
The general meaning is: Open source and too complete annotations have caused the barriers to the programmer industry to be broken and the threshold to be lowered. Therefore, as more and more people become programmers, especially those with any major or academic qualifications can do it Programmers have made the industry garbage and become a volume within a volume.
This statement seems to be very reasonable, but it is not the real reason why the programmer industry has become involuntarily and garbage.
I disagree with this statement.
The first point: industry characteristics are different
Our programmer industry is often compared with the doctors and lawyers industry. Many people say: Why can't we programmers become more popular as we get older like lawyers and doctors?
Let me first explain it from the perspective of reusability.
It's very simple. The technology used by our programmers can be encapsulated and reused. The same function can be encapsulated and open sourced, and the next person can use it directly, which greatly improves efficiency and spreads technology at the same time.
In the medical profession, their experience and techniques can actually be summarized and passed on to the next doctor. However, the biggest problem is that they cannot be reused. What does that mean? Even after I pass on my experience and skills to other doctors, that doctor still has to spend the same time doing a set of operations and seeing one patient. To a certain extent, the efficiency has not improved.
Programmers are different. Once a control or function is encapsulated, the next programmer can directly reference it, saving time. Where's the doctor? This operation still needs to be performed and the patient needs to be treated, so the process cannot be saved.
You see, from the perspective of reusability, reuse in the programmer industry not only reuses technology, but also saves time and greatly improves efficiency. The time doctors spend performing surgeries and seeing patients cannot be saved by reusing technology.
The same goes for lawyers. Lawyers' experience and ability can teach, but the same lawsuits have to be fought one by one. Because they are reused, the same cases in the future do not need to be fought, and the results will be obtained directly.
Therefore, open source has more advantages than disadvantages for programmers, and, in my opinion, it is not the real cause of the involution of our industry.
If there was no open source and every programmer would write all programs by himself from scratch, then the workload would be...
Second point: The low threshold is not caused by open source
One thing we must admit is that the low threshold is not caused by open source. It is because the application layer development that most programmers are engaged in has a low technical threshold. Even if there is no open source, everyone just spends more time and there is no difficulty. .
Look at those students who majored in finance or other majors and switched to computer science to become programmers. Most of them are application layer developers, right? The technical threshold for application layer development itself is low, and there is no open source. As long as you study hard, you can do it.
Look, for those engaged in artificial intelligence, big data, and algorithms, are there fewer people changing careers and competing for these highly technical positions? Because these technologies are really brain-consuming, they are also encapsulated and open source. Since it is open source, it is also very difficult to learn. Therefore, depending on the level of the threshold, open source is not the original sin.
Programmers who develop at the application layer are, to put it bluntly, no different from migrant workers moving bricks. It makes sense to be commonly called IT migrant workers.
The third point: high efficiency and involution cannot be equated.
Efficiency and involution are two different things.
Because of open source, programmers are indeed very efficient and do not have to do many things repeatedly. This is progress. Doing the same work over and over again is like a donkey that is not grinding, is it the same thing going round and round?
What is involution? Involution is inefficient competition and inefficient overtime. It was clear that nothing was wrong, but in order to please the boss, he appeared to be very diligent and worked overtime on purpose. The essence of involution is not for work, but for the sake of human connection.
Point 4: Low threshold cannot be equated with involution
If you look at many traditional enterprises and factories now, the barriers to entry are low, right? Recruitment is difficult and young people are reluctant to go.
I admit that open source has lowered the technical threshold to a certain extent, allowing many people to become programmers and intensifying competition.
Competition is competition, and involution is involution. Vicious competition is a bit involution.
You can think about it, before 2016, in the era of rapid industry development, no one talked about the topic of programmer involution, right?
I feel that the topic of involution only slowly emerged after the mobile Internet entered a bottleneck period, especially after 2016.
Everyone says that 2018 is the starting point of the second half of the mobile Internet, entering the capital winter. The reason for involution and intensified competition is itself caused by the oversaturation of the industry, which has reached a certain stage of development.
Whether an industry is eligible for admission or not has nothing to do with the low threshold. It is all related to industry trends, salary returns, and demand. It is not determined by any one factor.
What do you think of this?
Click on the official account card below to follow me
In the public account dialog box, reply with the keyword "1024"
Get free practical tutorials on how to make money with your side hustle
