The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#21

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 1:18 PM UTC

tjradcliffe wrote: post #4

yzzxy wrote: post #2

I'm considering several undergrad degree programs in computer science through university philosophy departments. Has anyone had a similar experience who could share their feedback? I've really enjoyed reading the basic philosophy I've covered so far and things like decision and game theory also fascinate me. I think it could also be a good track to AI research, though probably not the modern machine learning style? A…

I have an undergraduate degree in engineering, a PhD in physics and some post-graduate education in philosophy, and have worked closely with philosophers on real problems in epistemology and metaphysics, mostly around identity theory. On the basis of that experience, I would recommend focusing on a traditional CS or EECS degree, and take philosophy on the side. By taking a traditional degree you will provide yourself…

[deleted]

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#22

Post by Energy1 » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 1:54 PM UTC

kriro wrote: post #17

Ar-Curunir wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're interested in philosophy, I'd recommend a math or CS degree with an emphasis on PL theory/logic. If you're into game theory, consider CS and Statistics.

An economics minor could also work if you're interested in game theory but you have to check the curriculum carefully. Usually you can mix mostly statistics (or econometrics) and game theory to get the econ credits. I'd probably pick CS, math or psychology as a good combination with philosophy. Theoretical physics is probably interesting as well but I don't know much about it. Quantum physics seems almost impossible…

I'd pick pure math. Suffering through that makes everything else look sooooo trivial in comparison. Yes that includes the highfalutin' branches of Physics :)

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#23

Post by eli_gottlieb » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 2:11 PM UTC

tormeh wrote: post #12

Madmallard wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Major in the most practical stuff, minor in the interesting stuff. I'd say CS/EECS major, Philsophy and Math minors with focuses in AI for everything. You have the option after that for doing AI in a master's or PHD program.

But be warned: Modern AI is really just glorified statistics.

This statement depends on a quite expansive interpretation of the word "statistics", to include generative models over the real numbers (statistics proper, as we all learned it in school), nongenerative but probabilistic machine learning, probabilistic programming (aka: Turing-complete generative modeling), and the probabilistic approach to cognitive science (which uses more-or-less all of the above).

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#24

Post by theVirginian » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 3:32 PM UTC

tjradcliffe wrote: post #4

yzzxy wrote: post #2

I'm considering several undergrad degree programs in computer science through university philosophy departments. Has anyone had a similar experience who could share their feedback? I've really enjoyed reading the basic philosophy I've covered so far and things like decision and game theory also fascinate me. I think it could also be a good track to AI research, though probably not the modern machine learning style? A…

I have an undergraduate degree in engineering, a PhD in physics and some post-graduate education in philosophy, and have worked closely with philosophers on real problems in epistemology and metaphysics, mostly around identity theory. On the basis of that experience, I would recommend focusing on a traditional CS or EECS degree, and take philosophy on the side. By taking a traditional degree you will provide yourself…

If I could downvote you a thousand times I would. Philosophy is not 'imbecilic' as you claim. This type of thought only reflects your own shallow lack of understanding of philosophy and its crucial role.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#25

Post by yzzxy » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 3:39 PM UTC

Madmallard wrote: post #3

yzzxy wrote: post #2

I'm considering several undergrad degree programs in computer science through university philosophy departments. Has anyone had a similar experience who could share their feedback? I've really enjoyed reading the basic philosophy I've covered so far and things like decision and game theory also fascinate me. I think it could also be a good track to AI research, though probably not the modern machine learning style? A…

Major in the most practical stuff, minor in the interesting stuff. I'd say CS/EECS major, Philsophy and Math minors with focuses in AI for everything. You have the option after that for doing AI in a master's or PHD program.

Thanks for not answering the questions I asked - namely whether CS degrees administered partially by philosophy departments are any good - and for making the assumption that you know what is "practical" and what is "interesting" for me.

Not everyone wants to follow the classic SV career path.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#26

Post by j2kun » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 3:43 PM UTC

Considering that computer science these days is almost all about complexity and not computability, this article seems to be lacking. And moreover, where are all of the great minds from the last thirty years? Certainly the Turing award winners after Knuth have said interesting things.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#27

Post by chrisdevereux » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 3:49 PM UTC

kijin wrote: post #20

yzzxy wrote: post #2

I'm considering several undergrad degree programs in computer science through university philosophy departments. Has anyone had a similar experience who could share their feedback? I've really enjoyed reading the basic philosophy I've covered so far and things like decision and game theory also fascinate me. I think it could also be a good track to AI research, though probably not the modern machine learning style? A…

Philosophy PhD here. Get a degree in a STEM field and do philosophy on the side, possibly as a minor. Philosophy is badly in need of people who possess serious expertise in other fields and who can bring their expertise to bear on philosophical issues. We've had enough of people who only ever studied philosophy. On the other hand, if your university has some sort of interdisciplinary program that combines philosophy…

Speaking as someone who wasted time and money on an interdiciplinary philosophy programme that existed only for the sake of placating a particular professor (like, they didn't even bother making sure that the timetables were compatible), this is really great advice.

A lot of said programmes exist for exactly that reason.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#28

Post by brational » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 3:50 PM UTC

yzzxy wrote: post #25

Madmallard wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Major in the most practical stuff, minor in the interesting stuff. I'd say CS/EECS major, Philsophy and Math minors with focuses in AI for everything. You have the option after that for doing AI in a master's or PHD program.

Thanks for not answering the questions I asked - namely whether CS degrees administered partially by philosophy departments are any good - and for making the assumption that you know what is "practical" and what is "interesting" for me. Not everyone wants to follow the classic SV career path.

>Not everyone wants to follow the classic SV career path.

I'd argue that the previous poster's advice applies to ANY career path that isn't academia.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#29

Post by walterbell » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 4:11 PM UTC

theVirginian wrote: post #24

tjradcliffe wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an undergraduate degree in engineering, a PhD in physics and some post-graduate education in philosophy, and have worked closely with philosophers on real problems in epistemology and metaphysics, mostly around identity theory. On the basis of that experience, I would recommend focusing on a traditional CS or EECS degree, and take philosophy on the side. By taking a traditional degree you will provide yourself…

If I could downvote you a thousand times I would. Philosophy is not 'imbecilic' as you claim. This type of thought only reflects your own shallow lack of understanding of philosophy and its crucial role.

Yes. Principles of law and media are based on philosophy. Business model and technology innovations inevitably encounter unprepared laws. At those boundaries, you are either equipped with the philosophical tools to chart new precedents, or you are left to choose from a menu of canned options, none designed for your innovation.

Re: The Philosophy of Computer Science (2013)

#30

Post by j2kun » Tue, Dec 02, 2014, 4:13 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #6

"Who is the most original and the most versatile intellect that the Americas have so far produced? The answer "Charles S. Peirce" is uncontested, because any second would be so far behind as not to be worth nominating. Mathematician, astronomer, chemist, geodesist, surveyor, cartographer, metrologist, spectroscopist, engineer, inventor; psychologist, philologist, lexicographer, historian of science, mathematical econ…

Reading through the background materials, some of the claims they make seem a bit suspect. Many of the "discoveries" are that he suggested something might be possible without actually giving any evidence or construction besides his own philosophical musings. This is in re: cardinals, information theory, and computers. And then because someone did it later he is cited as a genius before his time.

But if he wrote over 10,000 pages of publications and articles, how many of his claims and ideas were false, misleading, or inaccurate? Is genius measured by the number of ideas that don't come to fruition, or by lasting successes? We don't cite Darwin as a politician despite his writings about the politics of his time. Nor do we particularly praise Turing as an athlete despite his running hobby.