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

The computer science degree isn’t dead

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 267 posts

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#241

Post by ghaff »

retired wrote: post #134
zipy124 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely correct. It's the same reason why an MBA or PhD can be valuable if you want to go the management track. In Europe specifically - especially in the UK - the class based system is still alive and kicking and is based on subtle tells such as education, name, accent and more. It's less overt than in say India, but still very much present.

I did what is referred to as a “fun MSc” (pretmaster) in The Netherlands. It’s a Master programme that doesn’t require much effort and doesn’t put you in too much debt but does allow you to put MSc behind your name. Some engineering firms (companies that do engineering as their core business) require all applicants to have an MSc. It is how I got my foot in the door.

I have an ME (pretty much MSc). I'm not sure anyone in the US really cares about the degree and I'd never put it beside my name except on a formal resume. I wouldn't say no effort; it took a couple of years.

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#242

Post by omcnoe »

camdenreslink wrote: post #201
lucianbr wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> better compilers, more ergonomic languages If anything it seems wide deployment of LLMs would go against this. When nobody writes code by hand anymore, who will care about the ergonomics of programming languages? And even if a few do care, how would you get adoption? I expect everyone will just use whatever is already used most.

I agree, it seems like the current most popular languages and frameworks will become ossified, because they have the highest amount of training data. It's hard to see a future where Python and JavaScript aren't the most popular languages to use (assuming LLM-assisted development is the norm moving forward).

LLMs can be pretty conmpetent at languages that have zero training data, at least to the extent that those languages use features/ideas that are familiar. I wrote a toy language/compiler and AI can write code for it competently.

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#243

Post by uuuuyjdjdd »

01284a7e wrote: post #150
jdw64 wrote: post #88

Learning can be done without a degree, but building connections and securing funding is difficult without one. A degree simplifies the cognitive resources needed to gain trust. Normally, gaining trust requires a lot of time. As a freelancer, it took me two years of very low-income work and repeatedly taking small jobs before I got my first real contract, simply because I didn't have a good degree. But if you have a d…

Becoming a professional software engineer without a Comp Sci (or overlapping engineering degree) was a bad idea for the reasons you mention. I made it 15 years on mostly willpower earning millions of dollars, but never worked for a FAANG in any capacity, was unemployed (and even homeless) for different stints starting out, and to this day still get asked why I don't have a CS or engineering degree. And a Haiku-powere…

[dead]

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#244

Post by jongjong »

taurath wrote: post #103
jongjong wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes 100%. I was born upper middle class. I have a BIT from a global top 50 University. I understood this after working in cryptocurrency sector in Germany. After I left Australia and moved to Europe, I realized after some time that 'the matrix' had demoted me into a lower social class. I had to work harder for less money and had access to fewer opportunities. Then I joined the crypto sector and the people there seeme…

> mechanisms built into the system to prevent people from different classes to meet IME these mechanisms are a natural outflow of how those with money and power delegate power or invest money. I have friends with a private plane. I also have friends who are scrambling to make rent, among many other friends always worried about their next paycheck. When you put the two together, you’ll find they can’t really engage in…

You occupy a very unusual place seeing such extremes of both sides.

I've only interacted with people with that level of wealth in a professional capacity. In my personal life, I know a lot of people who own multiple properties and businesses including some of my own family members but I don't think I know anyone with a private jet. The top of the range I know have big boats and big houses.

I feel like there is a social boundary between the old money and the new money.

The new money tends to be much wealthier and they don't like the old money folks. In theory, they could both talk with each other about exotic holiday spots, fine dining and boating/yachting but there is a different discomfort. And it's not about tech understanding because a lot of children of old money went into tech. I think the discomfort is that the new money folks see the old money folks as spoiled brats... But IMO, this is a result of the new money folks not seeing their own privilege; not granted by daddy, sure, but granted by the system itself.

My view is that nobody earned anything. They were chosen by luck of birth, chosen by a rich friend, chosen by a rich investor, or chosen by algorithm or a combination thereof. Usually based on highly superficial aspects. Their efforts have very little to do with it besides providing plausible narrative cover.

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#245

Post by chadgpt3 »

yieldcrv wrote: post #187
yieldcrv wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I enjoy the challenge and the sex. I think the speed limits in the hetero space to be with attractive women keep it interesting for nearly a lifetime. Things devalue when abundant, but it takes a lot for it to become abundant. But even then, it's not disinteresting instantly, I'm around a lot of people with similar libidos and interest in sustained variety, who have achieved that, and brought similar people together.…

emphasis on attractive, read as in-demand, difficult to stand out amongst

if you're thinking of banging ugly women just so you can bang - that's not how any of this works

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#246

Post by anal_reactor »

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #151
anal_reactor wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I do the reverse of that. I dress like shit and when introducing myself I specifically use the word "immigrant" rather than "expat" because signalling high social position attracts people who want something from me but don't offer anything in return.

I don’t see how this isn’t a massive net negative to you personally other than avoiding occasional odd conversation. You can have genuine conversations both personally and professionally with all sorts of people even if you don’t “dress like shit”. The expat versus immigrant thing is interesting but I assume most can see through that. Sorry to sound critical not really my intention but this is a very interesting appr…

Programming used to be attractive career exactly because you'd get a good job based on skills alone. There was no "you need to wear a suit to impress the client" bullshit: just show up, do a good day of honest work, go home with a fat paycheck. When you look at things from this perspective, signaling low-status also signals "I'm here because I can program", while signaling high-status also signals "I'm here to play office politics". So effectively, signaling low-status is a hidden signal that only other high-status people will recognize, while signaling high-status is a bluff that low-status people do.

It seems a little complicated but the idea itself is nothing new. When you go to a ghetto you'll see golden chains, expensive cars and other shiny shit. Go to a upper-middle-class neighborhood and you'll see things that look ordinary but are expensive on closer inspection.

Of course things have changed since then, but that's the gist.

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#247

Post by cindyllm »

yieldcrv wrote: post #169
anal_reactor wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gay so I have easy access to sex and TBH I don't really have much sex, almost nothing at all, because sex with most people just isn't pleasant. I cannot derive pleasure from it if there's no connection, and "wow I love your car" isn't connection.

I enjoy the challenge and the sex. I think the speed limits in the hetero space to be with attractive women keep it interesting for nearly a lifetime. Things devalue when abundant, but it takes a lot for it to become abundant. But even then, it's not disinteresting instantly, I'm around a lot of people with similar libidos and interest in sustained variety, who have achieved that, and brought similar people together.…

[dead]

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#249

Post by analog31 »

delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #240
analog31 wrote: post #144

This is reminiscent of my field, physics. As I was finishing my degree in the early 90s, I joined the American Physical Society, and received their magazine, Physics Today . Every month there was an article along the same lines: The physics degree isn't dead.

Why would anyona think Physics degree would be “dead”?

Employment of physicists has had its ups and downs. Academic physics research was impacted by funding, including a draw-down of defense related funding after the Soviet Union collapsed. Also, during my time as a student, mandatory retirement was outlawed, so there was suddenly a drastic reduction of retirements.

The number of people entering graduate study in physics never went down, so the academic career pipeline was flooded with talent. You had to be a research superstar to get a faculty job. I wasn't.

Meanwhile, physics had never really laid out a reliable path into industry. Getting an industry job involved a fair amount of luck. Many physics students became programmers. My first job after grad school was for a company owned by a relative of a fellow grad student, and my ancillary skills in programming and electronics have helped lubricate my resume as needed.

Re: The computer science degree isn’t dead

#250

Post by jplusequalt »

graphime wrote: post #9
antonvs wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you draw the line on that attitude? Do you not care about global warming because in your lifetime, you're probably not going to experience an unsurvivable wet bulb temperature where you happen to live?

> Where do you draw the line on that attitude? I draw the line at things that directly impact my net worth. > Do you not care about global warming because you're probably not going to experience an unsurvivable wet bulb temperature where you happen to live in your lifetime? Correct. I don’t care about global warming or climate change.

Nothing worse than a person who takes for granted all the hard work others put into society while smugly bragging about how they don't care about anyone but themselves.
Post reply on HN