Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#51

Post by foldr »

elblanco wrote: post #12

If cost is an issue, go to your local state uni (not private). The education will at least be credible and diverse, and you'll earn back your tuition in just a couple years out. Depending on where you live, some state schools are among the best in the country. It's terribly hard to justify going out-of-state or to a private school on a purely monetary basis unless it's someplace really very special or you get a free…

Having art in that same hierarchy as physics seems kind of beside the point. There are plenty of good physicists who wouldn't be able to pass an art course (and vice versa).

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#52

Post by npp »

To get some candidate schools, you may want to take a look at rankings (e.g. US News) for Ph.D. programs in computer science -- if you're actually sure you want to do CS, as people's tastes often change in college. The specific rankings are not to be taken seriously, but the top, say, 50 schools on such a list will all have a lot more than a "Java and C++ curriculum", and schools with strong Ph.D. programs usually offer plenty of undergrad research opportunities as well. The usual suspects are on this list but there are many others you may not know about.

This at least avoids the "Java/C++ problem", but of course, there are many other very important factors to consider in choosing a school, and in particular, you should go with the best all-round school you have as an option, not the one that has a slightly "better" CS program but not much else.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#53

Post by m0nastic »

I'll throw my vote for Worcester Polytechnic Institute (http://www.wpi.edu) as a school that has a diverse undergrad CS program.

It also has a wealth of other engineering students (chemical, electrical, mechanical, and industrial) who are forced to co-mingle to avoid going outside in the awful Worcester winter.

Despite not being as well-known as some of the more famous engineering schools, in the years since going, I've run into a lot of really sharp folks who also went.

I'd at least recommend it as one to look into.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#54

Post by bdickason »

bg4 wrote: post #46
bdickason wrote: post #35

Don't go to Purdue. Whatever you do, avoid it at all costs for CS. Yes, you will learn Java. Yes you will learn compiler design. But you will not learn ANYTHING about real world programming and you will find very few people with an entrepreneurial spirit. If I had to recommend schools it would go in this order: 1) Stanford 2) Carnegie Mellon 3) Anywhere in NYC (only because you are exposed to the opportunities of the…

Purdue has a thorough curriculum and they've made changes to help students better choose the direction they want to pursue (whether it be traditional theoretical computer science or something more applied, like software engineering). http://www.cs.purdue.edu/academic_programs/undergraduate/cur... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuY5XeEhX4g

They may have made some significant changes, but the curriculum that I see on the site you linked still looks very similar. Relational database are taught in 4th year and the curriculum as a whole has little to no grounding in modern technology.

If you're looking to learn basic programming skills, it's great. If you want to be part of a cutting edge program, as the OP seems to, look elsewhere.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#55

Post by elblanco »

Locke1689 wrote: post #49
elblanco wrote: post #12

If cost is an issue, go to your local state uni (not private). The education will at least be credible and diverse, and you'll earn back your tuition in just a couple years out. Depending on where you live, some state schools are among the best in the country. It's terribly hard to justify going out-of-state or to a private school on a purely monetary basis unless it's someplace really very special or you get a free…

At least at my school, there was an informal hierarchy of undergrad majors that indicated relative hardness (and therefore respect): Math > Physics > EE/Engineering > Computer Engineering > Computer Science > Software Engineering > Information Systems > Biology > all soft sciences like poly sci and intl relations > Art > Criminal Justice. Former physics minor: your hierarchy is useless. Advanced classical mechanics (…

I'm surprised classical mechanics would be the weed out course. I found discrete mathematics quite a bit harder than that.

But then again I found field physics and quantum physics quite a bit harder than discrete mathematics (and relativistic physics relatively straightforward no pun intended). I could probably still derive most of the equations for classical mechanics if I really sat down and worked at it (it's been many years since I looked at any of that material) but would definitely have a hard time with Maxwell's equations.

I didn't create the hierarchy, but I think it was the perceived hardness of the applied calc in field physics and applied dif-EQ in quantum that led the Comp Sci folks to hold the Physics majors in higher esteem (since we had to take like 9 credits of Physics and at least 2 lab courses at my school).

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#56

Post by elblanco »

foldr wrote: post #51
elblanco wrote: post #12

If cost is an issue, go to your local state uni (not private). The education will at least be credible and diverse, and you'll earn back your tuition in just a couple years out. Depending on where you live, some state schools are among the best in the country. It's terribly hard to justify going out-of-state or to a private school on a purely monetary basis unless it's someplace really very special or you get a free…

Having art in that same hierarchy as physics seems kind of beside the point. There are plenty of good physicists who wouldn't be able to pass an art course (and vice versa).

I suppose. I didn't make the hierarchy, it just seemed to be informally observed. There were definitely a fair number of people in the technical fields that took art courses for an easy A, almost no artists ever attended a course on discrete circuit design, or took a course in algorithm evaluation.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#57

Post by derefr »

rick888 wrote: post #41
derefr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True—I think I just have a problem with the fact that the University is the one in control of it. If, instead, the social network was the core organization and free to join, and the students rented out/purchased the buildings and equipment, and hired the lecturers and administrative staff, I can imagine it costing a might bit less and having a much tighter feedback loop in instructor, student, and course quality. (Pl…

"True I think I just have a problem with the fact that the University is the one in control of it. If, instead, the social network was the core organization and free to join, and the students rented out/purchased the buildings and equipment, and hired the lecturers and administrative staff, I can imagine it costing a might bit less and having a much tighter feedback loop in instructor, student, and course quality. (P…

1. Student loans and such—all the machinery students today use to get their tuitions—would still exist; they'd just be given directly to the student. 2. It would be a workers' cooperative, with the labor being learning. 3. Joining and participating would be different steps. The network would be free to join, but each class would still cost money, raised and pooled to create the class (in the fashion of groupon.com)

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#58

Post by foldr »

elblanco wrote: post #56
foldr wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having art in that same hierarchy as physics seems kind of beside the point. There are plenty of good physicists who wouldn't be able to pass an art course (and vice versa).

I suppose. I didn't make the hierarchy, it just seemed to be informally observed. There were definitely a fair number of people in the technical fields that took art courses for an easy A, almost no artists ever attended a course on discrete circuit design, or took a course in algorithm evaluation.

Well, I guess it depends on how tough the art courses are. My point was just that becoming a good artist is as hard as becoming a good electronic engineer. But if the art courses aren't rigorous then I guess that fact isn't relevant.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#59

Post by fburnaby »

> I crave the challenge ... Are there schools out there that will let undergrads touch research and tackle the problems that current computer scientists face today?

If you're actually as interested as it sounds you are, then go. Lots of people have found university to be a waste of time, but I can't help but think that it's mostly been the people who waste their time there.

I think it's a shame that so many uninterested people get 'duped' into going; they likely won't get much out of it, and it's horrible that their guidance counselors (or whomever) are misleading them into thinking it's a necessary step. But there's so much cool stuff that goes on there, and profs will let you participate in it if you actually show an interest.

Re: Ask HN: So What Universities Are Good?

#60

Post by rick888 »

derefr wrote: post #57
rick888 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"True I think I just have a problem with the fact that the University is the one in control of it. If, instead, the social network was the core organization and free to join, and the students rented out/purchased the buildings and equipment, and hired the lecturers and administrative staff, I can imagine it costing a might bit less and having a much tighter feedback loop in instructor, student, and course quality. (P…

1. Student loans and such—all the machinery students today use to get their tuitions—would still exist; they'd just be given directly to the student. 2. It would be a workers' cooperative, with the labor being learning. 3. Joining and participating would be different steps. The network would be free to join, but each class would still cost money, raised and pooled to create the class (in the fashion of groupon.com)

"1. Student loans and such all the machinery students today use to get their tuitions would still exist; they'd just be given directly to the student. 2. It would be a workers' cooperative, with the labor being learning. 3. Joining and participating would be different steps. The network would be free to join, but each class would still cost money, raised and pooled to create the class (in the fashion of groupon.com)"

As a student, I would still need to pay for infrastructure, a professor, and any other costs associated with the class. In addition to this, most students have no idea what they want when they start college. They need to be guided. Unless there is some sort of central authority creating all of the classes, I think it just wouldn't be practical.

If you joined for free, what would be the purpose unless you were going to actually get an education/pay for class?

Post reply on HN