This isn't a criticism of the author but as a society equating skillset with degree needs to end. For example, programming understanding and ability is not fulfilled by having a computer science degree per se, or even a closely related one, nor is it the case that someone with a different degree is not qualified for the task.<p>I've seen this firsthand, in that I've seen comp sci graduates who cannot understand what I consider basic programming, and psychology graduates who are very skilled at it. I'm not even saying that "applied use" supercedes everything, or that theoretical background doesn't matter, only that there are many ways of attaining this, and many have nothing to do with a degree per se.<p>It's like everything in society has to be rubber stamped by a formal certifying body.<p>I have a feeling this is one of the biggest changes in society in the last 100 years. In many ways complains about meritocracy are not about meritocracy per se, but what I might call "certificatocracy": placing weight on the wrong indicators, or overweighting certain things and underweighting others, or treating people as static objects incapable of change.