These machines are also unbelievably complex - one of the challenges in biology is the sheer volume of stuff to know.
I should have loved biology too
171–180 of 206 posts
Re: I should have loved biology too
#172My fork in the road with hard tech hard science versus biology was in high school. It seemed that students that wanted to become doctors took AP biology and students that wanted to be engineers took physics and chemistry. I had wanted to be an engineer since I was 12 years old so I felt the decision was already made. But all studying neural networks in college in the 80s I realized that there was this tremendously ri…
I am not sure biology is not a "hard science"?
Re: I should have loved biology too
#173My fork in the road with hard tech hard science versus biology was in high school. It seemed that students that wanted to become doctors took AP biology and students that wanted to be engineers took physics and chemistry. I had wanted to be an engineer since I was 12 years old so I felt the decision was already made. But all studying neural networks in college in the 80s I realized that there was this tremendously ri…
I would love to do this, I just cannot afford it as others have already stated. It's depressing to feel like I spend so much of my life at my day job and yet require it to afford the tiny portion I get left. I wish things were different.
Re: I should have loved biology too
#174My fork in the road with hard tech hard science versus biology was in high school. It seemed that students that wanted to become doctors took AP biology and students that wanted to be engineers took physics and chemistry. I had wanted to be an engineer since I was 12 years old so I felt the decision was already made. But all studying neural networks in college in the 80s I realized that there was this tremendously ri…
I would love to do something like this but simply cannot afford it. I think it is good advice but going back to school for a degree one does not plan on utilizing is not as feasible today as it was in the 80's, largely due to the sizeable increase in tuition without reciprocal increases in wages.
Re: I should have loved biology too
#175The good thing though in biology as opposed to physics and chemistry is knowledge is advancing quickly - since I went to college in the 1980s physics and chem are much the same but all sorts of new stuff has been figured out in biology and it's rapidly moving forward on things like how does the dna sequence turn into a given body design, how did life start, how do you make covid in a lab, is there likely to be bacterial life on Mars and so on. An interesting thing I learnt recently is bacteria may have partly shaped/made the continents. The idea, roughly, is they live deep in the crust and kind of rot it so part collapses into the magma.
Re: I should have loved biology too
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firstly, and this is worth pointing out, "computer science" is not about programming. It's about science, in this case specifically the science that makes computers work. At school I thought "computer science" meant "programming" - which it doesn't. So well done for recognizing this before wasting your much time. (Seriously, not sarcastic.) programming can easily be learned outside college. To other general readers h…
This is a myth. Computer science absolutely is about programming. The science that makes computers work is called physics. There are theoretical parts of computer science, but it is fundamentally a practical subject. All of it is in service to programming. Type systems are about typing programs. Algorithms are implemented using programs. Data structures are for use in programs. The very worst computer science lecture…
This was a point repeatedly driven home in my undergraduate curriculum, and in fact, they made a point of having multiple classes where a computer was completely uninvolved.
Re: I should have loved biology too
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most mistakes remain mistakes, and do not become part of the language. The idea that mistakes generally get accepted as correct is simply untrue, which is what you are implying. I am sure people will make the mistake, as they sometimes do today. But it is a mistake, and will likely be recognised as one. It is likely that the language gets more cemented by automatic spelling and grammatical correction, including using…
> The idea that mistakes generally get accepted as correct is simply untrue, which is what you are implying. I did not imply that at all. I said sometimes , so it's not that absurd that it could happen. It does happen though, and a quick google search will give you pages of examples.
With machines looking over our shoulders now and so much of language being typed instead of handwritten, odds are such drift might actually decrease in English... On the other hand, the introduction of AI leaves an interesting avenue for people to begin acting as if something is common usage and have the AI begin confirming that as common if it consumes that action. And then, of course, there's the effect of the machine itself... Most of us have a way to type "résumé", but we don't bother because the machine makes it too much work to do so, So the alternate spelling without accent, which was called out in my high school days as wrong, has fallen into common usage in a generation of people having to submit their resumes online (example: https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/a510363).
Re: I should have loved biology too
#178But indeed there was a lot of boring and story-less recitation during my courses. One my most vivid memory was that of a cell signaling course. This activate this and promotes this thingy. Half of the class was asleep. At some point the professor describe some of the function of the SSH gene. You've got a gradient of this stuff combined with two others gradients of other gene and you got a nice differentiation in embryonic development. Whatever, I was waiting for something else. But then we got unto the next pathway I don't remember nor care about. And that made me furious. It was indeed a "lifeless recitation of name",
Because SHH is an acronym. An acronym for Sonic Hedgehog ! As in Sonic the videogame mascot from Sega ! In serious developmental biology ! It's something unusual, something that sticks, something that's worth telling a story. But no, it's SHH, represented as a boring abstracted circle in an abstracted pathway. I knew the story (not from the olympiad people, maybe it was in a random listicle in the IFLS Facebook back when I used facebook), and I wish, I wish that the guy in the front who's supposed to be a professor and supposed to teach would go on a little tangent that drosophilia biologist generally name their gene in a funnier way than human biologists. The professor could just said that, just as a way for bored student barely out of their teenage years to have some interest, to make the material easier to stick somehow ! But no, "lifeless recitation of name" indeed.
The only molecule name I do remember from this course is cyclopamine. Because when I look for it in Wikipedia there's a frigging real cyclops photo in there. I think it was one of the rare instance of something cool appearing in the actual course slide, but I'm honestly not sure about it (incidentally cyclopanine disrupts the Sonic Hedgehog pathway)
Re: I should have loved biology too
#179I think this is true for most any subject taught in school. I have loved history since I was six and my parents got me my first adult history book. I love how all stories fit together, understanding why things happened the way they did, how and why people in the past thought differently than we do today, all of it. If you read a textbook, though, history is just memorizing one thing happening after another. Part of t…
just read foner if you want something easy or read black reconstruction in america by dubois if you want the key text.
Re: I should have loved biology too
#180A while ago, I taught CS for a year in a local high school. I can very much relate to the notion of "astonishing facts were presented without astonishment": as a teacher, you don't have the freedom to teach whatever you want (of course), but you're very tightly bound to a curriculum that's developed by the state government. And for CS, this curriculum was so uninteresting and uninspiring (what a surprise: 13 year old…
This is why most good teachers don’t use the books but find creative ways to still meet the standards. More work though, so fewer do it now with pay being so shit.