While some parents swear by piano lessons or Mandarin immersion camps, Thomas Dohmke, the CEO of GitHub, has a different message for the modern parent: forget the violin, teach your kid to code. According to Dohmke, the future belongs to those who speak the language of computers. And yes, he’s got a bit more street cred than your average PTA guest speaker—he’s been coding since before some of you even had email.
Let’s set the scene: It’s a world awash with AI, where GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT are writing code snippets faster than most of us can brew a cup of coffee, and yet Dohmke isn’t telling us to hang up our keyboards and let the bots take over. Quite the opposite, in fact. For him, knowing how to code isn’t just about future-proofing a career—it's foundational, on par with math or science. In other words, if you wouldn’t let your kid skip algebra, why let them skip Python?
Of course, Dohmke is preaching to more than just the choir of tech parents. His words sound especially urgent amid the tidal wave of panic (and speculation) that generative AI is making human developers obsolete. After all, why bother teaching your kids to code when robots will be doing the heavy lifting by the time they’re 18?
Because, as Dohmke points out, there’s a huge difference between “getting AI to write a function” and “actually understanding what’s happening under the hood.” He likens coding fundamentals to reading—sure, audiobooks exist, but no one’s advocating illiteracy as a life skill.
But let’s not sugarcoat it: relying on AI to “know enough” without learning the basics is like giving someone a car with no driving lessons, then blaming the vehicle when it crashes. The magic lies not in surrendering judgement to the machine, but in wielding its power with expertise and intention.
The real-world implication? Just as calculators didn’t make arithmetic obsolete (and, admit it, most of us aren’t doing calculus in our heads), AI coding tools won’t make software developers a relic of the past. If anything, they’ll raise the bar for creativity and problem-solving, not eliminate it. If Dohmke’s right, the next generation of coders will be less “human syntax compilers” and more “architects of digital possibility.”
He’s not suggesting every child must become a software engineer. Instead, Dohmke argues that programming literacy unlocks a way of thinking—decomposing big problems into smaller, solvable chunks, and not being intimidated by the unknown. As anyone who’s tried to interpret the mysteries of a browser error log can confirm, this is a skill that will pay dividends, even outside the development world.
But here’s the dark-humor twist: for all the talk of democratization and opportunity, coding still scares the pants off many adults, nevermind their children. Guidance counselors are hardly tripping over themselves to recommend “Intro to Algorithms” as a stress reliever. It’s not just about “getting kids to code,” it’s about fostering environments where failure is safe, curiosity is rewarded, and the teacher doesn’t flinch at the words ‘merge conflict.’
If Dohmke’s vision comes true, the classroom of tomorrow will use AI not to replace the brainpower of young learners, but to supercharge it. Hand a kid Copilot, and suddenly Hello World turns into a functioning game. But just as giving Michelangelo a paintbrush didn’t guarantee the Sistine Chapel, these tools amplify talent rather than replace it.
For the IT professional, the takeaway is clear: you may soon find yourself collaborating with junior colleagues who learned to code by conversing with AI rather than poring over thick paper manuals. It’s a paradigm shift—one that rewards adaptability and humility over hoarded knowledge. The future will belong not just to those with the most experience, but to those with the most resilience in learning new tools.
But let’s face it: with great power comes great potential for a spectacular mess. The ease of launching a project doesn’t guarantee its quality, security, or impact. If it did, the world would be filled with flawless apps and zero data breaches. When kids (and, let’s be honest, many adults) skip the “boring” basics in favor of pretty drag-and-drop interfaces, the result can be a patchwork of functionality with little depth.
The point here is that rapid prototyping—while exhilarating—makes understanding the fundamentals more, not less, important. Think of it as replacing carpentry with power tools; you may build faster, but if you don’t measure twice and cut once, well, you’re in for a world of pain.
Encouraging coding at home may not always lead to Silicon Valley riches, but it offers something arguably better: resilience in the face of automation and a fighting chance at shaping the tools of tomorrow, instead of merely being shaped by them.
Let’s not forget: most children don’t learn football to make the Premier League; they do it because it’s fun, social, and sometimes muddy. If coding becomes as normalized—and as joyfully chaotic—as neighborhood soccer, the tech industry’s future will be in good hands. Or at least, not exclusively in the hands of whichever AI is running the next hiring algorithm.
But that doesn’t mean the message is hollow. If anything, GitHub’s vantage point gives Dohmke a ringside seat to the shifting landscape: open-source projects blossoming in every domain, lone developers toppling industry giants, and code literacy becoming the currency of influence.
For IT professionals, educators, and policy makers, this is more than just a helpful hint from the C-suite—it’s a clarion call to double down on what matters. It’s not enough to advocate for “digital skills” in the abstract, or to relegate programming to an elective for the already curious. It must become core curriculum, as Prolog as PE, as PHP as Physics.
Moreover, the proliferation of AI-written code raises new concerns: security flaws, copyright ambiguities, and an avalanche of mediocrity as quantity outweighs quality. Dohmke’s vision only works if education policy, industry standards, and social support rise to the challenge.
Then there’s burnout and disillusionment—after all, not every child who learns to code will love it, and that’s okay. The point isn’t to force every square peg into a digital round hole, but to give every child the opportunity to try and see what fits.
As AI continues to integrate into every corner of our lives, perhaps we’ll see the return of the “renaissance child”—curious, adaptable, and just a little bit mischievous. Coding, in this future, will be less about typing perfect syntax and more about orchestrating ideas, collaborating across borders, and occasionally arguing with a neural network that thinks it knows best.
To parents: put the violin lessons on hold. To educators: rethink the electives. To IT professionals: get ready for a new breed of co-worker, who may have learned JavaScript from an AI, but still needs the wisdom of experience.
And to the next generation: whether you’re building the next must-have app or just figuring out why your loop won’t break (hint: it’s always the semicolon), know this—creativity, resilience, and a bit of healthy skepticism will serve you even better than the most powerful Copilot.
Because in the end, the future belongs not just to those who code, but to those with the courage to keep learning, long after the bots have gone to sleep.
Source: NoMusica GitHub CEO Urges Parents: "Make Your Kids Learn Coding"
Let’s set the scene: It’s a world awash with AI, where GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT are writing code snippets faster than most of us can brew a cup of coffee, and yet Dohmke isn’t telling us to hang up our keyboards and let the bots take over. Quite the opposite, in fact. For him, knowing how to code isn’t just about future-proofing a career—it's foundational, on par with math or science. In other words, if you wouldn’t let your kid skip algebra, why let them skip Python?Of course, Dohmke is preaching to more than just the choir of tech parents. His words sound especially urgent amid the tidal wave of panic (and speculation) that generative AI is making human developers obsolete. After all, why bother teaching your kids to code when robots will be doing the heavy lifting by the time they’re 18?
Because, as Dohmke points out, there’s a huge difference between “getting AI to write a function” and “actually understanding what’s happening under the hood.” He likens coding fundamentals to reading—sure, audiobooks exist, but no one’s advocating illiteracy as a life skill.
AI as the Great Equalizer—and the Great Unknown
Dohmke’s optimism is almost infectious. He believes that with the right foundation, today’s children will not only survive but thrive in an AI-assisted workplace. AI, he claims, is the great equalizer, empowering small teams—perhaps just a couple of inspired coders in a garage—to build the next unicorn startup. With Copilot-like tools, you don’t need an army of engineers or a wall of diplomas to launch something impactful.But let’s not sugarcoat it: relying on AI to “know enough” without learning the basics is like giving someone a car with no driving lessons, then blaming the vehicle when it crashes. The magic lies not in surrendering judgement to the machine, but in wielding its power with expertise and intention.
The real-world implication? Just as calculators didn’t make arithmetic obsolete (and, admit it, most of us aren’t doing calculus in our heads), AI coding tools won’t make software developers a relic of the past. If anything, they’ll raise the bar for creativity and problem-solving, not eliminate it. If Dohmke’s right, the next generation of coders will be less “human syntax compilers” and more “architects of digital possibility.”
Problem Solvers in Short Supply (And No, TikTok Tricks Don’t Count)
Now, beneath all this perpetual optimism, Dohmke admits that skills like creativity and problem-solving are rarer than a well-commented legacy codebase. By teaching kids to code, parents aren’t just launching them into tech—they’re preparing them for a world that rewards independent thought, structured analysis, and the sort of tenacity required to debug a mystery segmentation fault at 3 a.m.He’s not suggesting every child must become a software engineer. Instead, Dohmke argues that programming literacy unlocks a way of thinking—decomposing big problems into smaller, solvable chunks, and not being intimidated by the unknown. As anyone who’s tried to interpret the mysteries of a browser error log can confirm, this is a skill that will pay dividends, even outside the development world.
But here’s the dark-humor twist: for all the talk of democratization and opportunity, coding still scares the pants off many adults, nevermind their children. Guidance counselors are hardly tripping over themselves to recommend “Intro to Algorithms” as a stress reliever. It’s not just about “getting kids to code,” it’s about fostering environments where failure is safe, curiosity is rewarded, and the teacher doesn’t flinch at the words ‘merge conflict.’
The Double-Edged Sword of AI in the Classroom
Dohmke sees AI as a way to accelerate understanding, not as a crutch. There’s an irony here—AI tools like Copilot make it easier than ever for kids and beginners to tinker. There’s almost no friction between idea and execution. Yet, as with any shortcut, mastery remains a moving target. A child who only ever copy-pastes code is in as much trouble as the kid who never learns to ride a bike without training wheels.If Dohmke’s vision comes true, the classroom of tomorrow will use AI not to replace the brainpower of young learners, but to supercharge it. Hand a kid Copilot, and suddenly Hello World turns into a functioning game. But just as giving Michelangelo a paintbrush didn’t guarantee the Sistine Chapel, these tools amplify talent rather than replace it.
For the IT professional, the takeaway is clear: you may soon find yourself collaborating with junior colleagues who learned to code by conversing with AI rather than poring over thick paper manuals. It’s a paradigm shift—one that rewards adaptability and humility over hoarded knowledge. The future will belong not just to those with the most experience, but to those with the most resilience in learning new tools.
From Mouse Clicking to World Changing
Perhaps the most provocative claim Dohmke makes is that, equipped with coding know-how and AI support, today’s children can go from consumers to creators in record time. AI is the “force multiplier” for small teams and solo developers, letting ideas leap from sketchbook to working product at a pace unthinkable just a decade ago.But let’s face it: with great power comes great potential for a spectacular mess. The ease of launching a project doesn’t guarantee its quality, security, or impact. If it did, the world would be filled with flawless apps and zero data breaches. When kids (and, let’s be honest, many adults) skip the “boring” basics in favor of pretty drag-and-drop interfaces, the result can be a patchwork of functionality with little depth.
The point here is that rapid prototyping—while exhilarating—makes understanding the fundamentals more, not less, important. Think of it as replacing carpentry with power tools; you may build faster, but if you don’t measure twice and cut once, well, you’re in for a world of pain.
Parenting in the Age of Copilot: Less Hovering, More Empowering
For parents terrified that their child is losing out to the neighbor’s kid who built a robot in the garage, Dohmke’s advice is as old as time: foster curiosity, embrace mistakes, and resist the urge to micromanage every keystroke. Somewhere between helicopter parenting and digital anarchy lies the sweet spot where a love of technology can flourish.Encouraging coding at home may not always lead to Silicon Valley riches, but it offers something arguably better: resilience in the face of automation and a fighting chance at shaping the tools of tomorrow, instead of merely being shaped by them.
Let’s not forget: most children don’t learn football to make the Premier League; they do it because it’s fun, social, and sometimes muddy. If coding becomes as normalized—and as joyfully chaotic—as neighborhood soccer, the tech industry’s future will be in good hands. Or at least, not exclusively in the hands of whichever AI is running the next hiring algorithm.
The Corporate Angle: Why GitHub Cares (and Why You Should Too)
It would be naïve not to recognize the corporate interest underlying Dohmke’s call to arms. GitHub’s entire business model rests on the premise that people, young and old, are hitting “Commit” rather than “Quit.” More coders means more repositories, which means more… well, everything for GitHub.But that doesn’t mean the message is hollow. If anything, GitHub’s vantage point gives Dohmke a ringside seat to the shifting landscape: open-source projects blossoming in every domain, lone developers toppling industry giants, and code literacy becoming the currency of influence.
For IT professionals, educators, and policy makers, this is more than just a helpful hint from the C-suite—it’s a clarion call to double down on what matters. It’s not enough to advocate for “digital skills” in the abstract, or to relegate programming to an elective for the already curious. It must become core curriculum, as Prolog as PE, as PHP as Physics.
Risks, Realities, and the Road Ahead
Of course, it’s not all rosy. There are lurking dangers in Dohmke’s vision—notably the risk of widening inequality between the “have coders” and the “have nots.” If learning to code becomes the new signifier of privilege, then a generation of children could be left behind, trapped on the wrong side of the digital divide.Moreover, the proliferation of AI-written code raises new concerns: security flaws, copyright ambiguities, and an avalanche of mediocrity as quantity outweighs quality. Dohmke’s vision only works if education policy, industry standards, and social support rise to the challenge.
Then there’s burnout and disillusionment—after all, not every child who learns to code will love it, and that’s okay. The point isn’t to force every square peg into a digital round hole, but to give every child the opportunity to try and see what fits.
Humor Me: Will Tomorrow’s Kids Really Code?
Let’s be honest: for every child who dreams of being the next Ada Lovelace, there’s another who’d sooner eat their Chromebook than sit through another “loops and logic” lesson. Coding is not a panacea. It will not transform every schoolchild into a startup CEO or security researcher. But it’s certainly more useful at parties than reciting Shakespeare’s sonnets—unless the party is at the Globe Theatre.As AI continues to integrate into every corner of our lives, perhaps we’ll see the return of the “renaissance child”—curious, adaptable, and just a little bit mischievous. Coding, in this future, will be less about typing perfect syntax and more about orchestrating ideas, collaborating across borders, and occasionally arguing with a neural network that thinks it knows best.
Conclusion: Bet on the Builders
Dohmke’s core argument lands with the subtlety of a software deployment on Friday afternoon: teach your kids to code, and you’re investing in their future, whatever that future looks like. Until the day arrives when AI can handle empathy, judgment, and curiosity with grace, people who understand the logic behind the magic will remain valuable.To parents: put the violin lessons on hold. To educators: rethink the electives. To IT professionals: get ready for a new breed of co-worker, who may have learned JavaScript from an AI, but still needs the wisdom of experience.
And to the next generation: whether you’re building the next must-have app or just figuring out why your loop won’t break (hint: it’s always the semicolon), know this—creativity, resilience, and a bit of healthy skepticism will serve you even better than the most powerful Copilot.
Because in the end, the future belongs not just to those who code, but to those with the courage to keep learning, long after the bots have gone to sleep.
Source: NoMusica GitHub CEO Urges Parents: "Make Your Kids Learn Coding"