Does /sci/ agree with him?

>>7717898
Well, it's by definition not science, so he's right in that regard.
As for the computer part, maybe? CS majors tend to know jack-shit about computers and instead just know how to purely code, so I guess that's right.

>>7717907
>CS majors tend to know jack-shit about computers

source?

What if it was renamed to computing science?

Would that be more accurate than computer science?

I have a degree in not-computer not-science

>>7717911
It should just be called computing to be honest.

>>7717937
Computing theory maybe?

Computing makes it seem like you're learning computing processes, rather than studying how to use computing fundamentals to creatively address problems.

Just like I know how to perform calculations and find integrals but I don't know how to construct the set of all reals that i'm using in my calculations and formulate proofs on the processes i'm using when i do maths

>>7717909
Any college's CS curriculum

>>7717898
Of course computer science is science, science just means knowledge and you're learning computer knowledge

>>7717909
Go to any Uni, they literally don't know shit about the computer they use.
Some of them know how to run a linux system, but again, it's all a matter of computing.

Give them a ready-to-build desktop set, and they'd probably either trade it in for a Mac or give it to best buy to have them build it.

File: 1357477344686.gif (148KB, 311x360px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 311x360px

>>7717957
>science just means knowledge

Computational theory?

>>7717960
That is quite literally what it means kiddo

File: sicp1.jpg (3MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2448x3264px

>>7717898
Yes.

File: imblyin.png (27KB, 1001x438px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1001x438px

>>7717972
>kiddo

Studying anything means knowledge, you retarded faggot.

Does /sci/ agree with him?

>>>/g/51843858

>>7717988
So you agree then

>>7717950
>>7717958
Fuck you

>>7717957
>science just means knowledge

For fucks sake man. Learning python is not doing science you disgusting, disgusting fuck.

>>7718020
There's a difference between a computer scientist and a programmer.

>>7718052
>There's a difference

Oh, I wish. I really do.

I still remember back when I was applying to universities and my main interest was algorithms and computation. Of course my first option was CS but there it was. Every single university has
'Introduction to Java' 'Introduction to object oriented programming' 'Introduction to bullshit I already know and don't need to waste a semester in'.

That is why, even though my main interest is in theoretical computer science, I am now studying pure mathematics. The only degree with 0 bullshit classes, just theory.

And yes, java is not python but it is pretty much the same. Learning a baby tier programming language is not science.

>>7718096
This is almost definitely what I'm going to end up doing. I'm really interested in TCS but I can't even find a college that covers it before year 3, earliest. I don't want to spend 4 years learning how to be a code monkey.

>>7717907
>I have no idea what CS is!

>>7718121
Try going with a math degree instead, or math major with CS minor. Typically, the tCS courses are open to interdisciplinary students depending on which course. For automata theory and arithmetic hierarchy and shit, math is typically accepted, for qCS, typically both physics and math are accepted, etc.

As someone who enjoys the rigorous proofs of theoretical computer science but also building practical things and sperging out over implementation details and architecture:

Should I go into software engineering or comp sci? I got into both programs at the (fairly reputable) school I applied to.

>>7718253
>school
>practical
who is going to break the bad news for this one?

>>7718253
You'll know. Take courses in breadth, take a software engineering class, a systems engineering class and an algorithms class, and you'll know what you like.

You really don't know what you "enjoy" yet.

File: 1434080394260.png (305KB, 640x974px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 640x974px

Do I need a computer to learn computer science? Can I take a few books, go out into the wilderness with no electricity for 2 years and emerge with the equivalent of a comp sci degree?

>>7718280
Actually, yes

>>7718280
MIT doesn't even teach Scheme anymore. Every good university for CS switched from Scheme to Python.

File: Internet_map_1024.jpg (340KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1024x1024px

>>7717898
Computer Science isn't entirely about computers just as Physics isn't entirely about telescopes.
Computers and programming by extension are tools used in the field, not just the primary focus of the field.

Computer Science is the practical, mathematical approach to the theory of computation. When you boil it down, It's really a sub-field of applied mathematics. /sci/ will contest this to hell and back to protect their memes, but in truth that's what it really is.

>>7717958
That is because Macs always have been, and always will be, superior.

>>7718253
>As someone who enjoys the rigorous proofs of theoretical computer science but also building practical things and sperging out over implementation details and architecture:
>Should I go into software engineering or comp sci? I got into both programs at the (fairly reputable) school I applied to.

Depends on what you want to do with your life. Few people are going to pay you to do proofs unless you're really damned good at it. There are plenty jobs to actually build software and because most programmers suck ass, it's pretty easy to find a job if you're any good at it.

>>7718340
No one in /sci/ will contest you. We all agreed on that. CS is a practical degree. The point we make is that having a theoretical computer sciende degree with maybe a couple of applied electives per year would be far more useful for students. Not only would their degree be worth more but they would have a wider knowledge in the field because in any job they could apply their strong theoretical foundation to succeed where some applied CS guy would cry and ask the senior developer for help.

>>7718340
>Computer Science isn't entirely about computers just as Physics isn't entirely about telescopes.

Edsger Dijkstra is going to rise from the grave just to kick you in the nuts for mangling his quote.

His quote is fucking stupid anyway. Dijkstra was a goddamned mathematician. He refused to use a computer until very late in life and, even then, only for checking email. No, CS is not about computers but then again none of you losers are going to be getting a Ph.D and doing CS algorithms research for the rest of your life either like he did.

Most likely you're going to be a programmer and that means you'd goddamned well better understand where the CS theory starts breaking down and you have to start dealing with the limitations of the hardware. And that means understanding the how the computer works all the way down to the digital logic level.

>>7717915

underrated post

A true computer science degree should be called "algorithmics", anything else is software engineering.

But they won't because that would cut enrolment and comp sci is a cash cow.

>>7718411
>And that means understanding the how the computer works all the way down to the digital logic level.
Which is why computer engineering/EE with high-level programming skills is the true master race.

CS is just two things: processes and data

you study the costs/benefits and use cases of certain algorithms and data structures over others

It's not *really* about computers, you could do pure CS with a pen and paper, but as a rule, the human mind is very bad at rote computation and learning counter-intuitive methods doesn't really speed us up, so there would be no reason to study why Karatsuba multiplication is better than grade-school long multiplication.

The power and use of the subject is only apparent once you consider the power of a device that can compute billions of floating point operations per second. A change from a O(n^2) to a O(n) algorithm can produce drastically more data/results.

>>7718411
>He refused to use a computer until very late in life
wrong, he refused to _own_ a computer, in his home. he used computers all the time for programming

>>7718096
Take an AP class or something if you feel like you can get out of the programming introduction and into the theory part. You need to at least know the introductory programming stuff before getting into the algorithm theory, and not many high schools teach programming whereas every high school teaches math.

>>7718651
AP Computer science is literally the most bullshit course. It only covers the most basic stuff. Even if you've never programmed before, a whole year should get you a hell of a lot further than AP CS does.
If you look at the scoring guidelines for the free response, literally even the most obvious, dumbest mistakes are no penalty. It's crazy.

>>7717898
https://soundcloud.com/fecshrooms/696a

>>7718741
Eh

>>7718280
You'll be basically just studying mathematics at that point, so yes, partly. You can read programming books, but practice makes perfect.

>>7717898
/g/ fag here. I agree.

You learn jack shit in a CS degree. I learned more by teaching myself through Highschool.

>>7717898

Agree with what? That Computer Science is a science?

No. It's not a science.

Rocket Science is a science. Chemistry is a science.

Computer "Science" isn't a true science. It's a bit like saying "...oh....I have a degree in Bridge Science. Or Building Science".

Christ it makes it sound like the individual goes to some cheap ass unaccredited for-profit "college".

File: 1443235073165.png (64KB, 482x482px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 482x482px

>>7719917

>>7717915
I have a degree in mputer coscience.

>>7721042
I'm sorry, it has a degree in me*

>>7717958
They learn with asm

>>7718280
degree, no. Doctorate, yes.

>>7717909
CS is mostly just coding, you are not taught how computers work

>>7718337
I think Berkeley still uses scheme.

Isn't cs closer to math? With proofs through logic without empiricism?

>>7723000
For CS theory, absolutely.

>>7723005
My buddy had to take a computation theory class, and it was a lot of logic and decision tree type stuff.

I haven't taken a cs class ( finance/math here ) but I know that there's a difference between a programmer and a computer theorist.

>>7723022
Yep definitely. Computation, algorithms, data structures, various computing problems, and programming/formal languages can all be studied without any actual programming

>>7717907
In my experience it's because of a lack of effort on CS students' parts. I took CS as a minor and there were plenty of courses on computer architecture, how hardware worked and interacted with operating systems, networks, etc. Even designed circuits for basic components (adders, multipliers, comparators,...). Not physically, of course, but drew them out.

Anyways, a lot of CS students I met bitched and moaned about Calc II and how many times they had to take it. You could tell the students who loved computer science from the shitty ones who just wanted a 4 year degree in programming. They never gave a shit about the upper level classes that started viewing the computer as a physical (and abstract) machine and not just something they write shitty Java programs on.

>>7723048

>Anyways, a lot of CS students I met bitched and moaned about Calc II and how many times they had to take it.

I meant to add to that, since to me it showed how lazy most of these kids were, especially when it came to classes that weren't just programming.

>>7722977
>CS is mostly just coding
If your not a CS major, please don't make assumptions about what the major actually does.

Just as bad as those people who think physics is astronomy plus math.

>disagreeing with based abelson
>ever
pretty good way to show that you dont know what youre talking about

>>7723247
>Alma mater a state uni
>web dev
>not a Computer Scientist
>has no formal education in CS
>Thinks he's an authority on CS
>is only relevant because he made blog website

He is essentially moot tier. Holding him to any higher regard is insulting to people who actually know what they're talking about.

>>7723294
are... are we talking about the same person? Abelson has a PhD in Math from MIT.

>>7717958
>implying teenagers don't do that job for $10/hour at best buy
oh man, CS majors don't instinctively know how to apply thermal paste or screw in motherboard standoff screws, clearly this means they don't know anything about computers.

I mean, it's not like there's billions of guides out there on the internet.

Maybe a CS major is perfectly capable of doing these things, but values his time so much that he takes it to best buy because it's cheaper than doing it himself. Did you ever consider that?

>>7723334
I think you just got rused, friend.

>>7722977
I did a double major in CS and Math (before it was a meme).
We had to take whole classes in algorithm analysis, computer architecture, and data structures.

u r retard

>>7723350
>values his time
Nigga, you retarded. Go talk to any CS major. It's literally a party major.
They spend more time getting drunk and playing Halo than anything else.

>>7718337
>MIT doesn't even teach Scheme anymore.
That's because it was too obscure for the EE students. That's what Abelson himself said.

>>7718453
wrong

>>7718096
Nice. I did exactly the same thing. Be wary of job prospects though.

>>7722977
It's more than "just coding." Anyone can code, just like anyone can write.
That doesn't mean you can write code that anyone necessarily wants to use. That's where the schooling and math come in.

You say it's "mostly just coding," the first two years of computer science at an engineering college are almost entirely Calculus, physics, and discrete math. You also get your curriculum pads worked out during this time, and you take some token "welcome to cs" courses to remind you about why you're fucking there.

>>7722977
>>7717950
Bullshit, pretty much everybody takes computer organization using Patterson and Hennesy within the first year

I think SF should be the new SICP: https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/sf/current/index.html.

>>7725136
Nice link

>>7718096

Without one of those intro programming classes you'd have "intro to LISP" or "intro to pseudocode", "intro to lambda calculus" or worse "intro to Turing machines". If it's all the same shit why would you be so autistic about it?

>>7725191

You can disable tripcodes if you don't want to see it.

So what would y'all recommend studying if I really want to know computers? Would CS at a top 10 school suffice, or would something like pure maths + EE be a better choice?

>>7723000
Yup, I am actually convinced that theoretical CS (ie. combinatorics, information theory, formal languages, computability and all that) is a subset of math

File: haveureadurSICP.jpg (81KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 600x450px

>>7717898
HAVE YOU READ YOUR SICP TODAY?

File: LMAObama.jpg (35KB, 500x383px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x383px

>going into a meme field created to produce cheap IT labour
Hahahah poor cucks

http://rejected.us

>>7717898
literally the only thing CS will help you with that you might not be able to do yourself is build a portfolio for employment.

If you're genuinely interested and practice, you can pick up a desired language like cobol, learn it, and advertise yourself for a 60k+ a year starting wage at a bank or other firm

>>7725362
I'm surprised that CS is a major at all.
Do you think universities offered degrees in the use of abacus or calculators at any point?

>>7717957
nope

>>7717988
depends on your definition of knowledge. studying anything means obtaining information would be a true statement

>>7717898

I think that CS is simply too immature of a field (relative to physics, math, etc.) to really have a standard defined curriculum.

In some schools CS is just trade school level "how to program"

In others it's basically an EE program

In others it's basically an applied math program

Of course /sci/ is a bunch of pretentious faggots who love to look down on CS, and reference only meme-tier programming trade school unis.

That being said, CS is not a science (hypothesis and experimentation) and CS doesn't necessarily involve computers. It is simply the study of algorithms, which can be done by hand, by theoretical calculation machines (turing machine), or in practice, with a computer.

>>7717950
>Any US college's CS curriculum
there i fixed it for ya

i study pc science

>>7726567
>"All criticism is about shit schools" defense

Will people stop repeating this meme. There are no good schools for CS, even the top 10 schools have shitty CS programs.

>>7724393
>I did a double major in CS and Math (before it was a meme).

And let me guess, you avoided any of the more difficult classes like smooth manifolds, algebraic geometry, and functional analysis and took classes popular with the future high school math teachers.

>>7727252
>mfw this faggot acting like he could've got into MIT and Stanford CS programs if he wanted to

>>7723048
It's because most college kids think that just because they can use Facebook and can use their school's wifi that they're good with computers and that coding professionally is easy money. By the time they realize their mistake they've already invested a year or two in the major and don't have the balls or financial resources to switch to something else.

>>7725226
CE

>>7725362
Yeah desu senpai I study theoretical CS and I just consider to be a field of mathematics

>>7727252

Define "good CS program".

>>7727731

A CS program that actually covers a meaningful amount of material. A good CS program should look something like this:

>Fall 1
Calculus I
Intro to Proofs and Abstract Mathematics
Physics I
Intro to Programming
Technical Writing

>Spring 1
Calculus II
Matrix Algebra
Physics II
Digital Logic and Automata
Data Structures

>Fall 2
Vector Calculus
Physics III
Electrical Engineering Fundamentals
Computer Architecture
Algorithm I

>Spring 2
Ordinary Differential Equations
Probability and Statistics
Parallel, Distributed, and GPU Programming
Operating Systems
Algorithm II

>Fall 3
Numerical Analysis I
Combinatorics and Graph Theory I
Mathematical Logic
Digital Signal Processing
Programming Languages and Compilers I

>Spring 3
Numerical Analysis II
Combinatorics and Graph Theory II
College Geometry
Computability and Complexity Theory
Compilers II
Database Theory (Seminar)

>Fall 4
Abstract Algebra
Classical Number Theory
Computer Graphics and Vision
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Internet, Networks and Communication Systems
Professionalism, Ethics, and Conduct (Seminar)

>Spring 4
Linear Programming and Optimization
Computer Security and Cryptography
FPGAs, Microcontrollers and Driver Development
Software Engineering Essentials
Principles of Economics
Personal Grooming and Hygiene (Seminar)

>>7727768
but it is the basic CS program senpai

>>7727794

CS programs barely do a small fraction of that

is the german "informatik" the same as computer science?

File: 773e1f29917f762b6582ef36b04513ac.png (6KB, 343x383px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 343x383px

>>7727859

Yes

>>7727859

No CS = Codemonkey Studies It's called CMS at Caltech (Code Monkey Studies)

Informatik = recursion theory

>>7727971
>Informatik = recursion theory
Bullshit. German Informatik is even more watered down code monkey shit than American CS.

>>7717898
This guy is definitely leaning toward autism on the autismo scale, but yeah he is technically correct. It isn't by definition a science, and the term computer isn't really correct either. Unless they are actually being taught to design/build their own circuits, the computer itself is only a tool they use to run their software. It should really be called Software Engineering or How to Code for Dummies.

>>7717898
Depends. Seems like some Professors, usually those who aren't heavily into maths, prefer to keep things simple; which is good for learning. But at the same time, I like Professors that flush out everything.

As an example. Recently learned Kruscal and Prim's algorithm for graphs. The way it was explained to me was super simple, very methodical with little math.

A textbook I have explains the algorithms very differently, although it accomplishes the same goal. It clearly sets out that equivalence classes should be made and sorted based on weight, and then it goes on to further explain the legitimacy of the program by using a mathematical proof.

For most programs and algorithms, understanding the math part is what makes everything fall into place for me and it creates a bridge between my math knowledge and CS knowledge.

Then again, this is wholly dependent on a person's knowledge in Math and would hurt people who weren't familiar with math; although CS Majors should be familiar with Mathematics.

Sophmore year I got nuked in my programming II class because I didn't understand most of the math that was a part of the programs for his class. It wasn't until I finished Calc. 1 that I understood most of the stuff in that class.