You miss the point.

Sure, when you have years of programming experience you can just pick up syntax and start coding. How about when you have zero experience? Not so much helpful now.

The hypothetical poor chump came out of it knowing how to draw a stickman in javascript, right? Can't be that bad then.

If "coding bootcamps" are really the new "Learn [whatever] in [X] Days", then does that imply that those book are currently regulated, or should be regulated? Should the State of California protect poor chumps from books that might artificially raise their egos?

If they buy one of those books and work through it but don't get a job, they're out of some time and maybe $30, but they have some skills now. If they go to one of those boot camps thinking they're going to get the same job as someone who did a 4 year degree at an elite school and did a ton of side projects, they're probably now out of >$10k with arguably less skill than the person who went through the books.

I'm all for the government preventing fraudulent advertising. That's one of the things they're there for.

What is the bar here?

If I sell a self-help book for many thousands of dollars and people mistakenly ascribe undeserved value to my books, is California going to attempt to step in to protect the poor chumps?

I suspect not.

There's always more to focus on than can be focused on, but if you're doing a lot of damage to people via fraudulent claims, I would hope that regulators would come down on you hard.

yep then what about 4 year factor,s they just pose a threat to degree mill,s who do the same thing the fact is you can learn to code in12 weeks to some degree i am teaching my 4 year old to code ror and he is getting it