I’ve talked about Alex St. John repeatedly already, but I’m someone who likes to follow up on things. I took a look at his blog to see what’s been posted recently.  What I found has re-affirmed my opinion of the man.  Let’s explore some points of what he has written.

“Literacy is obsolete” – 9

Yes, this is actually something Alex St. John wrote. Fortunately this is more like being click-bait-y, or attention whoring rather than actually saying you don’t need to know how to read. He details his actual point here:

Coding is the new literacy.  The ability to communicate with computers and teach them to think is the key educational differentiator for almost all jobs in the future.  If you can’t code in the year 2020, you have as much career potential as any peasant serf in the 1500’s.  This is especially true for engineers and scientists.

His point is that literacy is no longer something that uniquely qualifies you in the workplace due to how widespread it is.  This is actually a good thing, no matter how negative the representation here is. Instead, the ability to code is what gives people a competitive employment edge. “But what about non-tech jobs?” we ask, brows furrowed with incomprehension. The Saint sees fit to drag us through the grim realities that us foolish Luddites will have to face.

Rapid and accelerating advances in computing and automation are making many traditionally human jobs obsolete very quickly.

The nature of the world changes. The nature of work changes. Technology changes work. All of this is true. However we are not anywhere near the point where all jobs will require proficiency in coding. There are far too many jobs, or whole sectors, that have no involvement with code at all. Implying that not only will ability to code be necessary in the future, but it’s necessary NOW is absurd. Will the ability to use computers with great acuity help? Certainly it can help with nearly any job. Using a computer is not coding, though. Here’s an example of how he overstates things:

Paradoxically one of the jobs that will be consumed by automation is human supervised teaching itself.  The internet is already teaching kids to read and write faster than their schools can manage it.

Yes, the internet helps kids know how to read and write. This is because it provides a more defined and direct reward system for success. To stretch this to say human supervised teaching will not be necessary is absurd. Discreet technical disciplines, perhaps partially. Human supervision will still be required to assist with questions no matter what.

To prove this, look at the number of engineers who can’t google solutions to their problems. This occurs right now in the real world with real people who are intelligent and skilled. Some may not think to look, others may not be able to present their problem in a way that a search engine can pull a solution. It is important to teach people how to ask the questions to get information from the internet. That doesn’t even touch on the problem of false information online.

Then there’s the fact that any remotely artistic discipline can’t be conveyed or tutored by a machine, since machines are automatons, and can’t react to any of these situations constructively. Teaching is a creative venture.

I haven’t even touched on socialization for children, but it’s time to move on to the next article.

“Evacuating Silicon Valley”  3

Here, Alex St. John bravely challenges the notion that having a presence in Silicon Valley is important for a tech business.

I would observe that the business climate and conditions in Silicon Valley are actually terrible and so is the talent.  I’ve worked at and with startups all over the world and the “talent” is superior elsewhere.  Nowhere on Earth is talent HARDER or MORE EXPENSIVE to recruit and retain than Silicon Valley.

This is a fascinatingly layered statement. On the surface, it sounds like good talent is difficult to come by in the Bay Area. Upon further consideration, if that is true, then why is it so hard to retain? There must be companies willing to invest in the talent in the area, implying there is good talent. It’s possible that there is so much competition for the talent that it has led to an artificial inflation of wages, and masking lackluster talent. That seems to be his intended meaning, as he later says:

“If you’re itching to start a company out of a garage, then you shouldn’t pick up and move to Silicon Valley, according to Google cofounder Sergey Brin.”  Now why would a Google founder go and say a terrible thing like that?  Because he’s trying to do everybody a favor, he’s trying to tell you that he’s going to hire away all the best talent available within a 1000 mile radius of Google HQ and he’s got the money to do it.

This seems to solidify the meaning of the first quote, but it opens up another problem. If wages in Silicon Valley are so good, then it should draw more talent to the area. Here’s a quick outline of how this can work.

• The success of Google raises the profile of the Bay Area.
• Talent wants to work at Google, so they move to the Bay Area.
• Some leave Google (Some don’t like it, some are poached, some Google doesn’t like, some want to work on different tech)
• Different companies in the area can take more talent, offering promotions, different projects, or entry on the “ground floor”

This is even based on the presumption that Google is the only tech game in town. There’s also Apple, Yahoo, Pandora, Electronic Arts, Twitter, Facebook, Cisco, and Youtube, just to name a few.

As with a lot of what Alex St. John says, there’s a kernel of truth, but he overstates it to the point where it hurts his credibility. Take this quote, for example. (emphasis mine)

I assert that successful entrepreneurs are only forged in adversity and too much capital, wisdom and “support” ruins them for learning to struggle and compete in the real-world.  I assert that real entrepreneurs, especially ones with lots of Silicon Valley experience and credentials should pack their bags and evacuate as quickly as possible for much greener pastures abroad.  In fact, having the courage to leave the valley is the most resume enhancing thing I think a modern entrepreneur should do.

“Only forged in adversity”…  The “only” there really tips his hand. The presupposition that success strictly requires adversity feeds into his thinking about work-life balance and burnout that caused him to launch to internet infamy earlier this year. Don’t misunderstand, I think that going through a crucible can improve a business, and help continue success. Anyway, if there is ever any competition, then you will have adversity. Therefore saying “success is only forged in adversity” is a tautology. If you are successful, there will be competition, and therefore you will have adversity. Building an argument off of circular reasoning like that does not serve the argument well.

“Doom for Windows” – 7

Alex St. John complains about Microsoft force updating things in a heavy handed way. There’s not much to talk about here. I’m only including it to not have a gap in the posts I mention.

Pages: 1 2