Where I come from, CS masters degrees are usually conversion courses for non-CS majors.
The case against CS master’s degrees
121–130 of 134 posts
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#122Someone without a formal CS education who's selling programming courses telling you that formal CS courses don't necessarily teach you programming (duh). He has a point that if you do a Master's you might be going without the extremely useful basic algorithms and data structures courses, but that is easily avoided by choosing a program that lets you take that. For other topics that aren't strictly programming, eg AI,…
The author's argument was immediately diminished the moment it became obvious they had something to sell.
Doesn't this line of thinking apply to every university too then?
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a manager, one has to manage many different personality types. Not all people are proactive in communicating that they need help or are lagging. The manager could go to each of his directs and ask these questions individually, but it is more efficient to do it as a group. The group setting also gives coworkers the opportunity to say, “oh, I know what’s going on. I can help with that.” Stand ups do not have to happ…
Those different personality types react differently to standups. Managing different personalities could mean providing different approaches.
It could mean that. It could also mean that there are some parts of working in a group (instead of solo) that are non-negotiable, such as periodically meeting with that group even if it is on a call.
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#124Someone without a formal CS education who's selling programming courses telling you that formal CS courses don't necessarily teach you programming (duh). He has a point that if you do a Master's you might be going without the extremely useful basic algorithms and data structures courses, but that is easily avoided by choosing a program that lets you take that. For other topics that aren't strictly programming, eg AI,…
I am someone who has a masters degree and I have taken Distributed systems, Computer Architecture and Advanced Algorithms at Bradfield. In my experience, I would rate Bradfield better than a master degree for these reasons -
1. Was more relevant and practical. It was taught by people who have worked building real things in the real world. 2. Better ROI on time spent learning. In about 8 weeks (roughly 2 hours every week) and some self study I had the confidence to apply the learnings and continue learning more. Time comes at premium to me as I am working full time and have a family to take care of 3. Cheaper than a university course. It costs 2k USD roughly for a course.
During the same time, I also tried OMSCS from GATECH. I felt I got way more from these Bradfield's courses by spending less time and money than OMSCS as well. That said, its just me and YMMV.
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#125Someone without a formal CS education who's selling programming courses telling you that formal CS courses don't necessarily teach you programming (duh). He has a point that if you do a Master's you might be going without the extremely useful basic algorithms and data structures courses, but that is easily avoided by choosing a program that lets you take that. For other topics that aren't strictly programming, eg AI,…
For other topics that aren't strictly programming, eg AI, ML, game theory, cryptography, quantum computing, probabilistic methods, optimization,... it would take a significant amount of dedication to match the amount of understanding that a rigorous course with problem sets can give you in self study. Also, you're going to have an extremely difficult time getting to work on that stuff without a degree, given that eve…
"end up on regular business bullshit"? CRUD webapps?
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assume quantum computers become mainstream or any other technological evolution? crazy to imagine I know, but that has been the tendency.
Quantum computers don't obsolete CS. They're a kind of coprocessor like GPUs and can't do most tasks faster than classical computers (or, actually, at all). I did specialize in "AI" in undergrad a year before deep learning was discovered and so most of what I learned about genetic algorithms/K-means/MCMC turns out to be kind of useless, but oh well.
Deep learning was discovered decades before that (depending on when you graduated). It just wasn’t feasible with the hardware at time.
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's saying a reasonable software developer salary is $150K which is likely true if someone is a software developer who is considering a masters program just for fun.
Is that a reasonable salary for a software developer just out of school? Only a faang would approach that amount for a new grad and that includes the extra bonus/stock grant.
In 2019 my employer posted the necessary H1B notices, and the new grad jobs were 115-130k. This was cash salary, and I believe the stock grants were minimal/nonexistent at that level. This was not a faang-level public company, nor a high-prestige/unicorn startup, in Seattle. 150k seems to me to be a pretty reasonable ballpark number for a software developer working in one of the cities with a high cost of living with a well-established ecosystem of companies competing for developers.
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quantum computers don't obsolete CS. They're a kind of coprocessor like GPUs and can't do most tasks faster than classical computers (or, actually, at all). I did specialize in "AI" in undergrad a year before deep learning was discovered and so most of what I learned about genetic algorithms/K-means/MCMC turns out to be kind of useless, but oh well.
Deep learning was discovered decades before that (depending on when you graduated). It just wasn’t feasible with the hardware at time.
Can't say my professor thought much of it at the time. I did have to actually learn statistics though, which should put me at an advantage over ML engineers if I get back into it…
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#129On the Contrary: A Masters Degree is often easier than an undergrad degree. You get a lot more freedom to do whatever the fuck you want. In most Universities, Masters students can teach/do research and get tuition forgiveness. If you want the experience of being in a college campus for a while without the bullshit involved in {undergrad, phd, jobs}, Masters degrees are the perfect middle ground. I did a Masters degre…
Academia is running out of ways to convince people in that trap. Evolve already. I believe academia as we know it, is in stiff decline and the problems in CS are exarcerbated because of the faster reality of software. Any degree, by the time you have it, might be deprecated or eroded to the point is pointless. If academia doesn't accelerate the pace between education/application, only wealthy people that can afford a…
I think you're missing the distinction between education and training.
On my Master's InfoSec degree, several students complained that the tech we were studying was really old. The professor simply responded that this is education, not training. You are expected to learn how to analyse the security of systems in general. The specific tech used is just an example.
Re: The case against CS master’s degrees
#130The article seems to argue from a vocational point of view. I don't know about the US, but around here, universities are not meant for vocational training. We've got another educational branch for that; universities are intended for academic training. The value of that for a job is that you ought to have learned how to keep abreast of new developments in the fields and how to make new skills in your field your own. Eg. (simplified) you may not know Java, but you know how to get to know Java - quickly and with great understanding.
That's what a bachelor is supposed to give you. A master on top of that is supposed to dive deep into one area in the field, and show you the basics of research in that area.
If you want to become a FAANG developer, a bachelor should suffice. A master education definitely has its advantages, but I doubt if there is any master programme anywhere geared towards becoming a rockstar developer. Masters aren't about becoming top-notch in something, they're about taking a broader, higher-level view. That sure can help someone on their path to rockstar developer, but it's up to the master how to continue given the acquired skills.