Apple CEO Tim Cook pops up in Canada to promote 'Everyone Can Code,' visit Shopify [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2018
Following his European tour last week, Apple CEO Tim Cook on Monday showed up at an Apple store in Toronto to discuss the importance of coding in education, talk up the company's Swift programming language and visit a few local developers.


Source: Tim Cook via Twitter


The trip, which found Cook at Apple Eaton Centre, marks the executive's first visit to the Great White North as company CEO, reports The Globe and Mail. Late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs visited Canada in an official capacity in the late 1980s, but the country is often overlooked as executives concentrate on other key markets.

In Toronto, Cook had a chance to speak with a group of students from Scarborough, Ont., who were visiting the Apple store to attend an "Everyone Can Code" workshop. Apple's custom curriculum exposes younger students to mobile app coding through fun projects based on the Swift coding language.

"Swift came out of the fundamental recognition that coding languages were too geeky. Most students would look at them and say, 'That's not for me," Cook said. "That's not our view. Our view is that coding is a horizontal skill like your native languages or mathematics, so we wanted to design a programming language that is as easy to learn as our products are to use."

Beyond pushing Apple's educational initiatives, Cook was in Canada to thank the company's regional team, as well as the 120,000 developers, designers, entrepreneurs and other professionals who contribute to the iOS and App Store ecosystems.

"Canada is an extremely important market for us. We have a great team in Canada," Cook said. "I want to do everything I can do to highlight their innovation, their companies and their work, because it is a critical part of the entire user experience. I wanted to come say thank you."

Cook also met with employees of Canadian e-commerce company Shopify, which is experimenting with augmented reality shopping features built using ARKit in iOS 11.

Cook's Canadian trip follows a similar visit to the UK, where the executive discussed the benefits of technology both in and out of the classroom. That meeting was time to coincide with Apple's recent launch of the "Everyone Can Code" curriculum in a number of European schools.

Update: Cook also spent time with Canadian singer Daniel Caesar, who was also featured in promotional images of the new Apple Music for Artists tool. A photo of the pair sitting in a music studio was posted to Cook's Twitter profile on Monday.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    I wish I’d known! I was off today! 😳😭
    Scot1
  • Reply 2 of 21
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,953member
    Anilu_777 said:
    I wish I’d known! I was off today! 😳😭
    why it's called a surprise visit.
  • Reply 3 of 21
    jdwjdw Posts: 753member
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.
  • Reply 4 of 21
    jdw said:
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.
    There’s a difference between “anyone can code” and “everyone will become a software engineer”. Apple doesn’t believe every single person should become a software engineer because that’s absurd. The point of the program is to expose people to the skill of coding, to try it out. To realize it is not arcane lore reserved for the techno-priests, but just a skill that can be learned. This is akin to teaching shop class or math or art or music — expose people and see who likes it enough to stick with it. 

    As our digital lifestyle will only grow, the sector and demand for coders will continue. The US and Apple itself was lucky to be ground zero fo the personal computing revolution, so there is no reason not to leverage this prime mover advantage. We lead global entertainment, why not computing and software?

    There is no down side here. 
    edited January 2018 Rayz2016chasmroundaboutnowScot1tmaydewmemacxpresslolliver
  • Reply 5 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,630member
    jdw said:
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.
    There’s a difference between “anyone can code” and “everyone will become a software engineer”. Apple doesn’t believe every single person should become a software engineer because that’s absurd. The point of the program is to expose people to the skill of coding, to try it out. To realize it is not arcane lore reserved for the techno-priests, but just a skill that can be learned. This is akin to teaching shop class or math or art or music — expose people and see who likes it enough to stick with it. 

    As our digital lifestyle will only grow, the sector and demand for coders will continue. The US and Apple itself was lucky to be ground zero fo the personal computing revolution, so there is no reason not to leverage this prime mover advantage. We lead global entertainment, why not computing and software?

    There is no down side here. 
    Well said. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 6 of 21
    jdw said:
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.

    Let’s stop teaching physics in high school, cuz, well, not everyone is going to become a physicist.


    Also noticed Cook was at the Leafs game with Kypreos (via Twitter).
    edited January 2018 Rayz2016dewmeStrangeDayslolliver
  • Reply 7 of 21
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,597member
    Just to add to JDW's great response: STUDENTS (of almost any age) need to be exposed to a wide variety of things they may not pursue vocationally; a wide-ranging education makes you a smarter, more creative, wiser person that would be of benefit regardless of what you end up doing for a living. Your life isn't your choice of job, either. This is why we encourage kids to study math, music, the humanities, science, agriculture, history, and many other areas -- to create well-rounded persons well-equipped to determine what they are interested in and want to do with their lives (inside and outside of work). Apple is not solely trying to grow an army of programmers for its iOS bitmines; they are promoting the idea that coding -- like math, music, shop class, foreign languages, swimming, first aid, and a hundred other areas -- is a skill that is learnable, that it encourages creative problem-solving and other types of critical analysis, and that even if you never code anything again in your life, you will gain some benefit from having had to investigate it. As I look back in my own life, things I learned in some of the classes I liked least in school have turned out to provide me with skills or insight that has proven consistently more useful than some of the classes I loved. :)
    tmayStrangeDayslolliver
  • Reply 8 of 21
    Scot1Scot1 Posts: 39member
    Rayz2016 said:
    jdw said:
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.
    There’s a difference between “anyone can code” and “everyone will become a software engineer”. Apple doesn’t believe every single person should become a software engineer because that’s absurd. The point of the program is to expose people to the skill of coding, to try it out. To realize it is not arcane lore reserved for the techno-priests, but just a skill that can be learned. This is akin to teaching shop class or math or art or music — expose people and see who likes it enough to stick with it. 

    As our digital lifestyle will only grow, the sector and demand for coders will continue. The US and Apple itself was lucky to be ground zero fo the personal computing revolution, so there is no reason not to leverage this prime mover advantage. We lead global entertainment, why not computing and software?

    There is no down side here. 
    Well said. 
     This will be a global contribution not just American
  • Reply 9 of 21
    jdw said:
    Learning how to program a few lines of code doesn't mean you can single-handedly program an app like FCPX.  And while we all need to start somewhere, it's important we go into learning code with realistic expectations.  Apple wants kids to learn to code because coding is hard, even in SWIFT, and Apple wants more coders in the future (great coders, A players) to help press their product line ahead of the competition.  "ANYONE can code" sounds nice but it isn't reality.  If we abandoned our private lives completely and focused exclusively on learning code, then perhaps more people could code.  But most people don't or can't do that.  Think me dismissive and negative?  Hey, I am a realist.  Those who disagree with me and really do think that ANYONE can code, just try to teach your grandmother SWIFT.  Try even teaching your mother.  "Where there's a will, there's a way."  I agree.  But many people lose the will a few minutes into teaching "code."  That clearly makes code a lot harder to learn than Macs are to use.

    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.  It's the superiority of 1984 Mac 128k's GUI versus text "code" of DOS or CP/M.  Computers need to get more powerful in terms of their software easy-of-use to empower more people to achieve things that were once unthinkable.  And in the end that won't transform us into the Bynars of Star Trek.  Advanced computing technology should help push human beings to a higher level without changing us into a computer.


    Did you just copy-paste your own post from another thread?

    Do you plan to do this every time there is a similar story? You know, like Sog wanting Apple to buy Shopify, or FreeRange's recent rants about closed threads?

    Rayz2016macxpresslolliver
  • Reply 10 of 21
    Tim visiting Scarborough got a certain Simon & Garfunkel song going on in my head!
  • Reply 11 of 21
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,240member
    AppleInsider said:
    "Canada is an extremely important market for us. We have a great team in Canada," Cook said.
    I hope we're not extremely important like the Mac Mini....  :#

    jdw said:
    The day AI progresses to the point we can begin "programming" computers via voice commands is the day "most people can code."  I think of it as using a WYSIWYG web design tool to get my creativity on the web without having to resort to HTML or JavaScript coding.
    You end up with a cr*p website. I'm not sure that makes a good analogy. :)

    chasm said:
    This is why we encourage kids to study math, music, the humanities, science, agriculture, history, and many other areas -- to create well-rounded persons well-equipped to determine what they are interested in and want to do with their lives (inside and outside of work).
    I'm not sure we really do this anymore, sadly... or have for a long time. Even back when I was off to college, it was about learning XYZ so you could make $ (which was generally a quite inflated projection). But, universities sure have lots of pretty new buildings while people are up to their eyeballs in student debt. Good in concept; very poor execution.
  • Reply 12 of 21
    mike54mike54 Posts: 339member
    Coding should be compulsory in primary schools. Kids are very quick learners and can learn multiple subjects, and coding should be one of them, just as music, maths, science should be. It's the thought process, structure and syntax are good skills to have. Just a decent level of basic knowledge that kids can build on or ignore later if they choose. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 13 of 21
    jdwjdw Posts: 753member
    There sure are a lot of browbeaters in this thread.  More than learning how to code, some of you good people need to learn the meaning of "tact." :smile: And just because I may have said some of the same things in another thread doesn't mean I cannot reiterate a point.

    The fact remains that the campaign slogan emphasizes "EVERYONE CAN CODE."  Schools don't promote other subjects using the same language, which is my point.  Imagine if a school said, "EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND ADVANCED CALCULUS!"  I certainly haven't seen Calc advertised that way before, and there is no mystery as to why not.

    To code (verb) means you understand, on some level, how to code.  But not "everyone" knows how to do that, even if they've been exposed to code in an educational setting.  My comments are therefore merely an observation of factual reality, not a call for people to stop teaching code.  We need to teach coding even in Kindergarten!  But the fact remains that not "everyone" can code.  Perhaps most people could if they really tried, but like I said in my previous post, not everyone is built the same.

    We need greater advances in coding tech to get even more people to code.  What differentiates machine language, assembly, basic, and SWIFT?  Higher versus Lower level languages.  Machine language is at the lowest level and is, unsurprisingly, the most difficult to learn and use.  Higher level languages are easier, relatively speaking.  Tim Cook likened the ease of learning SWIFT to the the ease of using a Mac.  I disagree with that.  My mother can use a Mac but she cannot code.  But if coding could be assisted with AI, as I said in my previous post, then perhaps even my mother could learn to code. Again, that was my point -- how to gather more people into the coding fold.  SWIFT is an improvement over some existing programming languages, but again, your mother isn't going to dive into it because it's just so fun and easy.  But if I could write code with an AI assistant -- ah, that changes everything.  Again, that was my point in my previous post, for those of you who missed it.  There's much more work to do in order to get "everyone" to code.

    I'm not the only person speaking of AI in coding:

    http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ai-write-code-microsoft

    and

    https://www.inverse.com/article/37191-star-trek-discovery-computer-code-windows

    "...code could start writing itself in way as well if we make progress on A.I."
    "
    I agree self-writing code will become more of a thing..."
    edited January 2018
  • Reply 14 of 21
    LatkoLatko Posts: 398member
    If Tim would have had real notion of software development, he would have vetoed parallel version development in iOS (simultaneously working on 11.2.1, 11.2.5, 11.3, even with beta programs going on) This very much explains returning bugs and (Wifi, Bluetooth, CarPlay, MS Exchange) anomalities - which as far as I can see have returned since.
    edited January 2018
  • Reply 15 of 21
    jdw said:
    There sure are a lot of browbeaters in this thread.  More than learning how to code, some of you good people need to learn the meaning of "tact." :smile: And just because I may have said some of the same things in another thread doesn't mean I cannot reiterate a point.

    The fact remains that the campaign slogan emphasizes "EVERYONE CAN CODE."  Schools don't promote other subjects using the same language, which is my point.  Imagine if a school said, "EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND ADVANCED CALCULUS!"  I certainly haven't seen Calc advertised that way before, and there is no mystery as to why not.

    To code (verb) means you understand, on some level, how to code.  But not "everyone" knows how to do that, even if they've been exposed to code in an educational setting.  My comments are therefore merely an observation of factual reality, not a call for people to stop teaching code.  We need to teach coding even in Kindergarten!  But the fact remains that not "everyone" can code.  Perhaps most people could if they really tried, but like I said in my previous post, not everyone is built the same.

    We need greater advances in coding tech to get even more people to code.  What differentiates machine language, assembly, basic, and SWIFT?  Higher versus Lower level languages.  Machine language is at the lowest level and is, unsurprisingly, the most difficult to learn and use.  Higher level languages are easier, relatively speaking.  Tim Cook likened the ease of learning SWIFT to the the ease of using a Mac.  I disagree with that.  My mother can use a Mac but she cannot code.  But if coding could be assisted with AI, as I said in my previous post, then perhaps even my mother could learn to code. Again, that was my point -- how to gather more people into the coding fold.  SWIFT is an improvement over some existing programming languages, but again, your mother isn't going to dive into it because it's just so fun and easy.  But if I could write code with an AI assistant -- ah, that changes everything.  Again, that was my point in my previous post, for those of you who missed it.  There's much more work to do in order to get "everyone" to code.

    I'm not the only person speaking of AI in coding:

    http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ai-write-code-microsoft

    and

    https://www.inverse.com/article/37191-star-trek-discovery-computer-code-windows

    "...code could start writing itself in way as well if we make progress on A.I."
    "I agree self-writing code will become more of a thing..."
    Technobabble nonsense. “AI” isn’t going to help your mom/students code — just saying that makes me know you aren’t a coder. No shame in that. But I am, and I’m telling you yes, your mom could learn to code. Again she won’t become a software engineer, but anyone can write and compile a “Hello, World!” program. And other novice projects, just as anyone can learn some foreign language or build a pencil holder in shop.

    “Anyone can code” is a great campaign because no one is confusing it for “everyone must code”. 

    BTW it’s Swift, not SWIFT — not an acronym. 
    cgWerkslolliver
  • Reply 16 of 21
    Latko said:
    If Tim would have had real notion of software development, he would have vetoed parallel version development in iOS (simultaneously working on 11.2.1, 11.2.5, 11.3, even with beta programs going on) This very much explains returning bugs and (Wifi, Bluetooth, CarPlay, MS Exchange) anomalities - which as far as I can see have returned since.
    First of all that isn’t the realm of the CEOs, they’re running the business not heading software development. 

    Second of all no. This is common everywhere and your conclusion that it’s responsible for bugs is not fact. Revision control branches the code into different streams for different work items, projects, bugs, etc. There is a process to integrate it back so it’s not as if they’re just checking in their outdated Bluetooth library on top of the stable production branch every time. “Oops! Did I just overwrite your stuff? Sorry!” Nope, not how software engineering works. 
    dewmelolliver
  • Reply 17 of 21
    Cook was also photographed with Rene Ritchie of iMore at some sporting event together (Hockey? Curling?) and Ritchie posted the picture on his Twitter feed.
  • Reply 18 of 21
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,223moderator
    jdw said:
    The fact remains that the campaign slogan emphasizes "EVERYONE CAN CODE."  Schools don't promote other subjects using the same language, which is my point.  Imagine if a school said, "EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND ADVANCED CALCULUS!"  I certainly haven't seen Calc advertised that way before, and there is no mystery as to why not.
    The equivalent wouldn't be a specialty within the subject, they would say something like Mathematics for Everyone:

    https://math.dartmouth.edu/undergraduate/majors/why-major/evennonmajors.pdf

    The equivalent to 'Everyone can understand advanced calculus' would be something like 'Everyone can understand dependency injection'. Something as basic as addition is useful in everyday situations. Something as basic as an Excel formula is similarly useful the more that things become digital.

    It's the same with other digital skills like movie editing, this is a skill that is useful to a broad range of people. Most people will never advance beyond cropping movies but that's enough to be useful at some point and that's all it needs to be. If all someone ever does is make a single web page for their art portfolio and it gets them a job then it was worth investing their time in.

    Learning a coding language may not be necessary in the long-term. There are visual ways to do the same thing that are more approachable. One example would be Apple's Automator where you put blocks together or Photoshop's action recording. It generally comes back to text because it's the most compatible data format that is the most extensible to accommodate future needs. JSON data format would probably work because this is a representation of objects. There can be a visual editor that formats object structures and allows them to be transparently compiled in any language behind the scenes.
    cgWerkslolliver
  • Reply 19 of 21
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,240member
    jdw said:
    To code (verb) means you understand, on some level, how to code.  But not "everyone" knows how to do that, even if they've been exposed to code in an educational setting.  My comments are therefore merely an observation of factual reality, not a call for people to stop teaching code.  We need to teach coding even in Kindergarten!  But the fact remains that not "everyone" can code.  Perhaps most people could if they really tried, but like I said in my previous post, not everyone is built the same.

    ...

    I'm not the only person speaking of AI in coding:
    ...
    "...code could start writing itself in way as well if we make progress on A.I."
    "I agree self-writing code will become more of a thing..."
    I think nearly everyone (at some point in the future) will need to (or at least be greatly benefited by) a base knowledge of coding. They won't all become software developers.

    re: AI - I think this is mostly baloney. I can see AI or ML assisting in various ways, like helping correct syntax or knowing a function call I might not have on top of my mind or such, but it isn't going to write the code as that is a creative process (something AI can't do). It's kind of like the difference between spell/grammar-checking and writing.
    lolliver
  • Reply 20 of 21
    jdwjdw Posts: 753member
    Fascinating how some staunchly defend the status quo of how coding is done today, as if tech won't advance beyond your wildest dreams in the future.  

    A hundred years after we are all dead and gone, I assure you AI of that future will be vastly different and more advanced than today.  I am not suggesting it would replace a human being.  But even today we are talking about how AI can assist people.  Heck, we are moving fast toward trusting it to drive us around on the open road, without any human intervention.  

    So rather than defend the way things are today (which one is inclined to do if they are a coder today, emerged in the languages of today), we should be open to what the future will bring.  I am open to that, and it is in that future day the current Apple slogan "everyone can code" will be a far more accurate statement.  Coding should be taught today and I think Swift (or SWIFT -- I defy grammar Nazis!) is an excellent language that should be taught even in Kindergarten.  But I think some of those young people learning Swift today will grow to become the people who see deficiencies in it and they will work all the harder on improving AI & ML with the aim of helping even more people interact with computers on a "programming" level.  We need visionaries who advance tech along side the coders who make those advancements possible. 

    Here's to the crazy ones.

    The misfits.
    The rebels.
    The troublemakers.

    The round pegs in the square holes.
    The ones who see things differently.
    They're not fond of rules.
    And they have no respect for the status quo.

    You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
    About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.

    Because they change things.
    They push the human race forward.

    While some see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.

    Because the people who are crazy enough to think
    they can change the world, are the ones who do.

Sign In or Register to comment.