Stanford CS Curriculum 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#111

Post by ido » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 11:11 AM UTC

sdevonoes wrote: post #95

ido wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was similar for me (no physics but 2/3 of the courses were math) about 20 years ago. I suspect they do it because way more people sign up to study CS than the university can afford to have graduating every year, so they need a way to "filter out" a lot of students. They already filter out a lot in terms of admissions (you need quite good grades in high school to be able to attend the first year) so I'd wager if th…

> It's a fair point that CS is not the same as "programming vocational school" but seeing what companies use as criteria for hiring junior programmers you can't really blame the students. True. I don't regret attending (and passing!) all those math+physics lectures to be honest. All the stuff I missed in uni regarding software engineering and programming I learnt them quite fast and easy in my own time (e.g., at leas…

I managed too, but the problem is a lot of people who didn't could have been great developers. Your ability/tolerance to math/physics isn't proportional to your ability to become a good programmer (not any more than any other mentally taxing activity at least).

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#112

Post by mohanmca » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 11:49 AM UTC

jlos wrote: post #17

latenightcoding wrote: post #14

as a self taught individual I always find it outstanding how much things they are able to pack in a CS degree and how fast people forget all this stuff after graduation. Like how many of your coworkers from top CS schools remember most of the material in their compilers, cryptography, comp bio courses? EDIT: To clarify, I'm not criticizing this approach, I think it's great to expose students to as many subfields as p…

The best parts of education is not primarily the material you remember. It's the effect on your thinking patterns as a result of studying and the familiarity with a school of thought. For example, I studied Greek before software engineering. I've forgotten quite a bit, but theres an entirely different set of thought processes I have access to while doing software engineering because of it.

Thanks! I believe in it! We don't know what we don't know, if we learn only useful stuff!

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#113

Post by ruang » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 12:17 PM UTC

anamax wrote: post #34

bsder wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like how many of your coworkers from top CS schools remember most of the material in their compilers, cryptography, comp bio courses? Nobody forgets a compilers course. A "compilers" course is probably the first CS course where debugging is real--and terrifyingly hard. A compilers course converts a programmer from a "null pointers are bad" person to a "null pointers are evil " zealot. Compilers courses are probably…

Huh? I've taken a compilers course, at Stanford no less. I've written a couple of compilers and some near-compilers. (A very fast simulator can be a lot like a compiler.) I don't think that null pointers are evil. In fact, I like null pointers. My beef with null pointers is that very few languages support multiple null pointers. (No, mocked objects or sentinels are NOT a good substitute.) Yes, I want multiple isNull…

Can the Stanford compiler course be self-taught given the online material? What's missing?

I've seen it available on Coursera. And a lot of the current material is available online. But I tried the Coursera one awhile ago and got stuck.

I'm finishing a CS degree but there's no dedicated compiler course here.

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#114

Post by Cistro » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 12:39 PM UTC

I wished there was a list that maps these classes to it's equivalent on Coursera / edx (if they exist).

I've noticed that interesting classes like SICP cs61a from Berkeley still take place online (their material is available), but are no longer available on the MOOC platforms. The same goes with some interesting MIT classes (Introduction to Computational Thinking)

(Although a certificate from such platform doesn't mean that much to me, it does help somewhat with motivation and looks better on a beginners resume than nothing. )

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#115

Post by sdevonoes » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 12:47 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #101

sdevonoes wrote: post #91

Looks really good. I still remember the curriculum of my CS degree in Europe: - first year: Mathematics I, Mathematics II, Mathematics III, Electronics I, Electronics II, Digital Circuits, Statistics I, Physics I. The rest was about software and programming (at least!) - second year: Mathematics IV, Statistics II, Physics II. The rest was about software and programming (nice!) - third year: software and programming o…

That looks like a CompEng degree, something of a mix of CS and EE content. The physics and digital circuits courses don't seem very typical of pure CS degrees.

To be honest, in Europe, when talking about universiy degrees, there was no hard distinction between Computer Science, Computer Engineering and Software Engineering 20 years ago. It was all the same. Nowadays there is (I have been told).

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#116

Post by lotsofpulp » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 12:58 PM UTC

matkoniecz wrote: post #80

Judgmentality wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand, what's the controversy with Potti? The dude was a piece of shit - what else is there to discuss? I'm not being condescending I genuinely don't see any nuance like you're stating. When is it ever okay to fabricate data?

> When is it ever okay to fabricate data? When you want to deliberately sabotage something. What may have its place, but obviously not in such case (obviously not applicable in cancer research like in this case).

Which should be obvious to anyone who has made it to 18 years of age.

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#117

Post by low_tech_love » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 1:09 PM UTC

When I browse around these courses, I see a couple of high-profile names teaching them, but it's interesting to see how the overwhelming majority of the teaching work is done by brilliant people who almost never make it to the spotlight. I hope they are getting the recognition they deserve at least in their inner circles.

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#118

Post by seppel » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 1:19 PM UTC

cauthon wrote: post #64

rawtxapp wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I've never seen any value whatsoever in these ethics classes (note: I'm not saying it's not an important topic, it's extremely important). The hypotheticals and situations presented and discussed in many of them are very similar to yearly mandatory classes we have to take at FAANG (and many other workplaces I assume) and it boils down to having a checkbox that says "I'm not stupid". Real world ethics is much mo…

Sounds like you just haven’t taken a good ethics class. I was required to take one in grad school (comp bio/biost at) taught by a law professor. Every week we were assigned a case study on a real-world ethics problem, such as the Duke/Potti scandal [1]. We wrote up answers to 5-6 discussion questions ahead of class, then spent the class time in small group discussion rather than lecture. I think it was one of the mos…

> a real-world ethics problem, such as the Duke/Potti scandal [1].

Why is this an ethics problem? That's just "normal" scientific fraud, isnt it? What is there to discuss?

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#119

Post by hellbannedguy » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 1:22 PM UTC

user3939382 wrote: post #52

npunt wrote: post #39

Given the power tech has over the daily experiences of billions and how many questions of values and ethics it is now directly confronting in society, I'm a little surprised there's just one ethics course and one law course that cover these subjects, and they're electives [1]. We all know much of the learning in engineering is on the job anyways, so the role of formal education is less about particular job skills and…

I've been asked to do things I was ethically conflicted about. What I learned is that the best way to be ethical is to be rich, because telling your boss you refuse to do things is easier said than done when you have a family to support.

I have found when it comes to money/career; 99.99% of people look the other way, or rationalize their cowardness, or greed.

In college, 1 out of a 1000--10000 (I'm pulling these numbers out of the air) students ever publicilly questioned a teacher who wrong, or unprepared. Yea--I get it. They can ruin your life, esecially the bloated senile fools with Tenure.

And yes--it's easy to be ethical if your are wealthy.

I walked out of a Chiropractic School because Subluxations are maybe 1 in a miiilion, and any success in Chiro is based Placebo.

So many in health care are absolute ethical frauds that fall back on The Art of Medicine in order in order to make more money.

My elderly mother has pain in both shoulders. He doctor's office said the doctor can only exam one shoulder per visit. Just rediculious bill padding. I'm not worried because the pain in in both shoulders, and related to movement.

I won't get started on my Psychiatrist who demands I see her monthly in order to get a prescription refilled. And yes--the rediculious meetings are me giving her $159 cash for a 5 minute session with someone I despise personally/professionally. Why--because I'm addicted to the two highly addictive drugs, and I've been on the drugs for decades. I figure why put my body through a detox at this point. I have to play the charade.

Re: Stanford CS Curriculum 2021

#120

Post by markus_zhang » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 1:25 PM UTC

sdevonoes wrote: post #91

Looks really good. I still remember the curriculum of my CS degree in Europe: - first year: Mathematics I, Mathematics II, Mathematics III, Electronics I, Electronics II, Digital Circuits, Statistics I, Physics I. The rest was about software and programming (at least!) - second year: Mathematics IV, Statistics II, Physics II. The rest was about software and programming (nice!) - third year: software and programming o…

Complex analysis/complex variable calculus

You need this? Damn the students who could trough through this must be good. IMO only real analysis and complex analysis in that list are real math that deal with a lot of proofs.