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

I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

blog.carolynworks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#31

Post by rdouble »

heresy wrote: post #30
strlen wrote: post #27

As jerf has pointed out, this is Impostor Syndrome. It is present in men as well. Ironically, the better programmer I've become, the stronger it has gotten. The thing is, while scary, it's perfectly normal. The only advise I can offer is just to ignore it. So what if it is true and you "don't belong" or you're a bad programmer: so what? It's still something that you enjoy and can make a career, a rare luxury for most…

So what would you recommend someone self-taught who just bombed his past couple of interviews do? Nothing like failing on elementary math questions to make you feel like a class A idiot, especially if your title is 'Senior Software Engineer', and here I go, bombing on freaking word problems in a numeracy test. I feel like a total fraud, like I'm in the wrong field, I could have done those easily straight out of high…

Do you have access to iTunes U? There are loads of courses available from basic math all the way to advanced computer science. I majored in Math, not CS, and used a few algorithms classes to come up to speed with stuff I should have known already.

For brain teaser type problems, I like Martin Gardner books.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#32

Post by ramchip »

hardy263 wrote: post #7
SamReidHughes wrote: post #3

In programming most of the variance in ability is explained by intelligence and not effort. You can take, for example, some non-CS student, teach them programming by saying "look, here's how you do it", and if they're the right student, they'll instantly be better than 90% of CS students. (And if they're not, they won't be. Oh well.) A lot of nerdlingtons who "know" programming and argue about Java going into their f…

I doubt they'll "instantly" be better than 90% of CS students, but if they're interested, they'll ultimately put in more time by themselves to learn how to program. I remember that I was learning to program just as I was entering high school. I fell in love with programming instantly, but it does not mean I didn't spend hours upon hours debugging my first few programs to see what went wrong. But I didn't have anyone…

> all my programs were imperative styled, not OOP

Nitpicking here, but I'm quite sure OOP and imperative programming are orthogonal concepts. Clojure is a mostly functional OO language, while Java is a mostly imperative OO language.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#33

Post by paganel »

roel_v wrote: post #29
j_baker wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's a specialist/generalist thing. I think it's a "do you have interests outside of programming" thing. In my experience, the image of the ultimate hacker is someone who eats, breathes, and drinks programming (which used to be me). As I've grown older, I've learned to appreciate the value of learning things outside of programming.

'value' to who? You yourself and your direct environment, presumably. How much did your other interests contribute to your software skills? Maybe a bit, but not as much as other skills would have that you could (with directed effort) have learned in the time you spend on other things. I'm not saying it's wrong, I too live my life for myself, not for others, and not to be the very best developer I could potentially be…

> Socializing, a family, learning macrame - all of those things do not add to being the ultimate hacker.

When you build stuff for the outside world to use (software, architecture etc.) then knowledge of the "outside world" is of extreme importance. You being the "ultimate hacker" or the greatest architect since Phidias has no importance whatsoever.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#34

Post by wyclif »

roel_v wrote: post #28
wyclif wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was with you until you advocated the 80-hour work week. That's a sure recipe for burnout, not necessarily excellence.

No it isn't, there are plenty of people working hours late that and slugging through it. And it's true that 80 hour weeks don't 'necessarily' lead to excellence; actually it's quite obvious. However, there aren't many people who do achieve excellence without extreme dedication. So working 80 hours will add to the results you will achieve. It's not for everyone, fine. Not everybody can be top 1%. By definition, 99% ca…

Where did I "pretend that we're all equal and everybody is the best?" Please don't set up a straw man. And my argument was not that there aren't "plenty" of people working those kinds of hours. I am simply not convinced that working 80 per week = excellence.

You're equating hours put in with working harder and smarter. If someone plays the drums for 80 hours a week but has no natural sense of rhythm, they'll never excel as a drummer. If you want to make Gladwell's "Law of the Few" argument, then make it (or cite it) and leave off the false analogies.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#35

Post by lsc »

jonafato wrote: post #8
SamReidHughes wrote: post #3

In programming most of the variance in ability is explained by intelligence and not effort. You can take, for example, some non-CS student, teach them programming by saying "look, here's how you do it", and if they're the right student, they'll instantly be better than 90% of CS students. (And if they're not, they won't be. Oh well.) A lot of nerdlingtons who "know" programming and argue about Java going into their f…

Doesn't this go against the 10,000 hours thing? Sure, taking someone who is smarter and has more experience than other students and putting them in front of a computer will yield these results. However, someone who is solely smarter and does not normally program will not likely produce good code. Expertise is much more about practice than raw ability. Most of the really good programmers out there are really good beca…

Have you ever worked with someone who is more than one standard deviation smarter than you are? I highly recommend the experience. I have watched people go from novice to better than I am in just a few years, and I have rather a lot more than 10,000 hours in my field. Hell, I have at least that much in my sub-specialization.

Mentoring people, especially if you can mentor people who end up learning faster than you did, who end up becoming better than you are is extremely rewarding, I think, and humbling.

I mean, experience is important, but intelligence can act as a multiplier on experience. It's like anything else; Everyone, if they start lifting weights, will get stronger. But, some people will get stronger faster, even if they lift the same weight the same number of times.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#36

Post by billswift »

jerf wrote: post #9

Think about how many students were in your freshman level courses. Now think about how many students are in your senior level courses. Add a fudge factor for the larger dispersion in senior level courses if you like, but don't forget seniors are also taking more of the courses per semester as well. The size difference is basically the number of people who dropped out. A few may have dropped college altogether but man…

>The size difference is basically the number of people who dropped out.

Not hardly. There are a lot of people in other disciplines that take lower level computer science courses. Quite possibly more than are enrolled in comp sci itself.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#37

Post by billswift »

heresy wrote: post #30
strlen wrote: post #27

As jerf has pointed out, this is Impostor Syndrome. It is present in men as well. Ironically, the better programmer I've become, the stronger it has gotten. The thing is, while scary, it's perfectly normal. The only advise I can offer is just to ignore it. So what if it is true and you "don't belong" or you're a bad programmer: so what? It's still something that you enjoy and can make a career, a rare luxury for most…

So what would you recommend someone self-taught who just bombed his past couple of interviews do? Nothing like failing on elementary math questions to make you feel like a class A idiot, especially if your title is 'Senior Software Engineer', and here I go, bombing on freaking word problems in a numeracy test. I feel like a total fraud, like I'm in the wrong field, I could have done those easily straight out of high…

Grab a couple of basic textbooks and read through them. I have mostly learned through general reading and narrow practice; which means I have occasional holes in my knowledge. When I see a need to fill the gaps, I get a basic textbook and start reading, since I already know a lot of the material, I only slow down to study when I need to.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#39

Post by billswift »

KevinMS wrote: post #16

computer science != programming Why does this very basic fact elude so many?

Computer science requires programming. Computer science without programming is like biology or chemistry without lab skills, or studying a language without being able to write.

Re: I know I belong in computer science, but sometimes I wonder.

#40

Post by billswift »

praptak wrote: post #26

I think I might add some different perspective to that. I was (and to a degree still am) one of those guys who went home from the lab to spend some more time on programming for fun. Besides the obvious non-IT-related downsides (made me obviously less social), it also has some IT-related downsides. Even on the purely technical career path (programmer->senior programmer->tech leader->architect->???) the more you advanc…

>made me obviously less social

I often wonder about this; which is cause and which is effect. Most of the people I have seen that are really "obsessed" with some subject were less social before they started focussing. The focus grew out of their greater available time and less peer pressure, rather than the other way around.

Post reply on HN