Program crashing at startup? Okay, let's add debugging statements.

Can't get the debugging statements to execute? Okay, let's try removing code.

Doesn't fix the problem? Okay, let's keep removing more... and more...

A couple hours later, so much code was removed that the entire program had become nothing more than an empty main function that still crashed. This led to the following rule which I try to follow to this day: Make sure that you're actually compiling and executing the same copy of the code that you're modifying. ;)

Why we are teaching trigonometry to everybody? I never understood that. Seems like a complete waste of time. Have aptitude tests and then do advanced math only for those that actually can understand it and benefit from it.

Now _that_ is the first sensible argument for trying to teach coding to everybody that I have heard. I am all for that. But, of course, it should not be a full-blown core subject for this, just a sort-of mandatory side-course.

Using computers and building and programming computers are two very different beasts.

While I have to say I really loved the geometric proofs (we had them here when I went to school), I am not sure there was a single other pupil that did more than learning them by heart or ignoring them. They are excellent for the few that understand the ideas behind them, but a complete waste and an unnecessary burden for the others.

I am with you here: You can improve logical thinking with coding (and with many other activities), but you need to have significant ability in the first place for that to work. Most programmers do not use logic to create their code, they use imitation. Consequentially, they do not have much of a clue what their code actually does besides the one main obvious function. That is why so much code is so unreliable and so insecure. That is also why most people will not benefit from learning basic coding skills and will never advance beyond those basic skills. Coding is hardcore engineering and doing it well requires significant talent in addition to training and experience. Without that talent, your chances of ever becoming good at it are non-existent.

I do not know what you do in CS, but I do pretty demanding engineering and some actual applied science. Your comment illustrates what is wrong with most "coders" though.

On the other hand, while any learning is beneficial, some subjects are more so and some less. If you focus on those that are less useful, you are getting a negative effect as there is no time left for the more useful ones. It is difficult to decide what is most useful, admittedly.

I do not think that CompSci is a core subject. It is really important for society, true, but so are EE, medicine, city-planning, etc. Core subjects should be those that a majority will need often in their personal and professional life.

I think this is less of a problem. The 90% of people that do not use hyperlinked content were not using the web at all not so long ago. The hyperlinked web is not going away.

Some research required. Or you will remain dumb...

Indeed. And spam their communications into the ground.

There is a lot of reason to argue what the limits if what we know are. And at this time, intelligence and consciousness are not understood at all. It is important to keep that in mind, or bullshit deductions will come out.

Wow, somebody with god-like powers. Now that is credible...

I am not. Not even that much is clear at this time. This could also very well be interaction with an universe where physics actually allows thinking matter. Or something else. Because it does not look very much like intelligence and consciousness generated by matter is possible in this universe. And it gets less and less plausible the more we know.

I am merely pointing out that by observing the interface of the box, you cannot find out what is in it or whether there are hidden communication channels. Ant observing the interface is all we can do at this time.