Bill Gates is the perfect man to quote, to evidence the intrinsically self serving nature of modern production standards:

"The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour.

Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?"

On of the richest and most powerful men on the planet, who ascended to his current position through copying and pasting other people's ideas together in the most profitable way (when not outright stealing them,) of course considers the work of programmers to be a million or billion times more productive. If we're referring to the number of dollars in Gates' bank account, that is literally true.

But productivity alone does not afford equal access, or improved quality of life for end users. Despite numerous leaps forward in technology, low wage workers still pound out eight hours of labor a day just to be able to barely pay their rent with enough left over to buy cheap beer.

Sure, there are robots that you can do your job, but you can't afford one, so keep flipping those burgers.

In order to accurately evaluate production, there are other relevant factors to include in the gauge, namely access and efficiency.
A brief example would be ethanol, which America is producing in larger quantities than ever before; but the market is kept afloat by subsidies, and the production process results in a net loss of energy.

It's totally inefficient.
We burn more coal to produce power, and drive more trucks farther, not to mention sacrificing valuable land area to a crop that operates at a net loss... In an attempt to solve the problems of fossil fuels.
MASSIVE FAIL.
BUT,
By volume, more productive.

Terrible for everyone, and the environment, but very profitable.
At the end of the day, that seems the only factor anyone cares about.

Does it count as productivity if we're making things that no one needs?
Or things that no one wants?
If we increase our productivity of toilet paper, can we effectively measure success by the number of asses wiped by forests?

Without a basic standard of literacy enabling peer to peer communication between actual human beings, so as to determine what is considered of value and therefore worth producing... What positive difference does it make if programmers or programs enable us to produce more?

At the same time as programming literacy increases, if the ability of the average human to communicate with other humans decreases, the end result is a train running at full speed on unfinished tracks.

Going nowhere fast.
We're lost, but we're making great time!