It’s unsurprising that coding has been folded into “making.” Consider the instant gratification of seeing “hello, world” on the screen; it’s nearly the easiest possible way to “make” things, and certainly one where failure has a very low cost. Code is “making” because we’ve figured out how to package it up into discrete units and sell it, and because it is widely perceived to be done by men.
Debbie Chachra – “Why I Am Not a Maker”
I have to admit, part of the reason I picked this quote is because I felt called out. A large reason I decide to delve into the world of Computer Science, without haven taken anything of the sort before my time at Carleton, was the satisfaction of doing work and seeing a response. That very first “hello, world” I printed delighted me in a way I really hadn’t been before.
That all said, the second half of the quote speaks to the reality hidden behind this childlike glee of spending hours on code just to get it to work. All that work will eventually be sold off.
Now, this is a pretty distressing thought but instead, I think it can empower people to take a similar stance as those in the digital humanity camp do. Make things for those that need it the most not necessarily for those who can pay for it. Obviously, you need money, that’s just the kind of world we live in but for those that can, a change of perspective might do the world some good.
With all that being said, digital humanities and its MANY tools are a great place to start shifting the focus of computer science. I personally am really excited to get my hands dirty with some of the mapping software that can do some work in putting historical events onto the map, literally. The idea of starting to place, in our current reality, stories from ages ago is not only satisfying but helpful in getting a better understanding of those events. A better understanding of the past can only further our ability to comprehend the present and future.
Matthew, this quote also really stuck out to me. It reminded me that being able to create, and especially to own our creations, is a privilege (as Karl Marx would say lol). Creation takes capital and is often exclusive to the community members who hold power.
This quote also struck me, and I share the satisfaction with the immediate response to coding. I also think it is fantastic to make things for the people who need them the most – it brings the kind of perspective and satisfaction that you just can’t get selling your product.
Matthew, I thought that your point regarding shifting the focus of Computer Science towards making things for those who need them was really interesting and insightful, and I think it really aptly highlights Chachra’s points regarding the underlying patriarichal, capitalistic factors that really underpin what it means to “make,” and how the term may be a bit more arbitrary than it may appear at first blush. If, say, computer science were to shift more towards helping others rather than packaging and selling product, would it still be considered “making”?