In the book, it explains that the pre-ipo stock he was granted at FB was approximately equivalent to what he would have gotten from the Twitter acquisition.
Do you not worry that people who are not researchers, who are providing essentially the "TL;DR" of a disease, will provide incomplete or potentially misleading advice?
Computer Science alongside other subjects is a hell of a lot more impactful than most liberal arts classes. I rarely meet non-engineers (or people with some sort of technical training) who know how to think analytically worth a damn. Introducing CS would certainly help this.
And this argument is basically decrying the semantics of "Learn to code". Yes, the term is ambiguous. That's not the point. I believe it's called using layman's terms.