Live data from Hacker News

Computing belongs within the social sciences

cacm.acm.org

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#31
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When have those decades of research ever actually been applied to "create a platform that's more beneficial for society?"

You're joking right? You're proving the article's point. The social sciences have informed policymakers for decades. The US was founded by social scientists (as TFA defines them, the social sciences include philosophy and so on).

Isn't that more worthy of damnation than praise? Superpredator broken windows, and all other sorts of convenient bullshit. Now policymakers are all about very selective hearing for demagoguery to be fair. We know this well enough because the absolute dumbasses still think cryptography backdoors are a good idea in spite of every credible expert screaming at them for decades "No you fucking morons! It would weaken our own security while not even helping for actual bad actors!"

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#32
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entities and disciplines can communicate without being the same. An idea we seem to be losing, not in small part thanks to social science.

> not in small part thanks to social science. I'm genuinely curious what you are referring to here?

My, admittedly limited, understanding of current social science theory seems to claim more and more that boundaries of race, class, gender etc are real boundaries that preclude identification and understanding. I identify with men, because I am a man, I can't possibly understand a woman's point of view for the same reason. We are encouraged to believe in privileged positions where knowledge is spesific to this position and irrelevant in others.

Computing requires a common language and a common understanding, as does any discipline where you are dealing with the real world. If you extend social theory into computing you WILL end up with people claiming it is discriminatory to privilege any ideas within the field. Sounds like a nightmare to me.

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#33
post #18

I agree that there should be room for ethics but the recommendations in the article seem extreme and lacking. Especially the "Web development" example in section 2 seems to be quite off. In fact the counterargument for section 2 seems to be very convincing! CS/IT is such a broad, rapidly progressing field that you cannot be prepared enough on technical subjects. As someone who has no formal CS education I'm impacted…

I majored in CS in college, and I would say there is actually easily enough room for additional, non-technical/mathematical subjects in the curriculum.

As part of my major, I was required to take: two calculus courses, two physics (or chemistry–but almost nobody did) courses, linear algebra, and two discrete math courses. I can confidently say that aside from some very basic physics from the first of the two classes, I have used absolutely none of the knowledge in any of those courses in my life, and if we are just talking about my career (mostly working on Etsy and Trello), then I haven't even used the physics. The rest, I have effectively forgotten completely.

Some of my CS electives also proved not to be that useful for much; for example, my courses on computer graphics, compilers, and operating systems. I retain some basic knowledge from those courses which sometimes come in handy for quickly understanding tangentially-related concepts, but definitely nothing to spend entire semesters on.

Of course, I'm not arguing that nobody who studies computer science should learn the things I've listed, but it seems silly to me to make them required. I took both my calculus and physics courses during my first year of college, and by my third year, I had probably forgotten almost 100% of it. In terms of my career trajectory, and even in terms of the value of knowledge/education for the sake of being knowledgable/educated, it was a complete waste of my time and money.

Often times, I wish I was able to learn a wider variety of things in college.

I think the bigger issue here is that computer science is so tightly coupled with software engineering. I hope that as time goes on, we get better at separating the disciplines in the same way that we've separated other sciences from engineering (e.g. chemistry vs chemical engineering, physics vs mechanical/civil engineering, etc.).

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#34
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physicists and mechanical engineers simply do not wield the same amount of power that computer scientists/software engineers do. FYI the article does not suggest literally putting CS in the social science department. TFA is just arguing that in light of how CS is applied in society, computer scientists need to be more broadly educated. I was a cryptography PhD student for awhile and I can tell you by-and-large CS aca…

On the contrary it's easy to make this argument for physics. Would physicists have developed the atomic bomb if they had been required to take a few extra courses in social sciences and if physics departments had an extra multi-disciplinary professorship? I don't believe this would have made any difference. The suggestions are at the same time radical and pointless. Arguably he is simply trying to colonize other fiel…

Historically that may have been true; I won't argue that point.

The difference between the atom bomb and CS is that the latter has a ubiquity of access and reproducibility that subject it to completely different ethical and philosophical concerns. The atom bomb doesn't change or influence our understanding of how political discourse operates in modern democracies. Things like social media and GPT-3 do.

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#35
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the issue with big social networks (and other big tech actors) is one of ignorance. It seems to me many of the bad things they do are very deliberate. Sometimes the things they don't care about are also very deliberate. Google is perhaps the champion of causing harm by not caring about things. This is sometimes ascribed as being caused by their "engineering-centric culture", but I fail to see how engine…

Try to avoid generic phrases like "causing harm". "Google is the champion of circumventing long established norms, such as the prohibition on wiretapping, and evading responsibility for doing so" says a lot more than "causing harm".

Blaming Google for that is some bizzare history retconning bullshit. You want the DHS, FBI, CIA, and NSA for that.

Calling Google wiretapping would be like calling your bank a wiretapper because they log every transaction. Those previously listed bad actors with badges agencies doing so would be business as usual.

It is utterly exasperating to see "Big Tech" magically become the magnet for blame of things they don't even remotely do and see people believe any ole bullshit that confirms their preconceptions.

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#36
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary it's easy to make this argument for physics. Would physicists have developed the atomic bomb if they had been required to take a few extra courses in social sciences and if physics departments had an extra multi-disciplinary professorship? I don't believe this would have made any difference. The suggestions are at the same time radical and pointless. Arguably he is simply trying to colonize other fiel…

Historically that may have been true; I won't argue that point. The difference between the atom bomb and CS is that the latter has a ubiquity of access and reproducibility that subject it to completely different ethical and philosophical concerns. The atom bomb doesn't change or influence our understanding of how political discourse operates in modern democracies. Things like social media and GPT-3 do.

I'd like to add that, when building an atom bomb, you are well aware of what you're doing - why you're still doing it is an entirely different topic (an interesting one which, in fact, falls right into the social sciences). Software engineers at facebook, on the other hand, are likely not aware of the full impact of their work. Their seemingly harmless and objective algorithms literally, although indirectly, cause deaths, and the engineers working on them should be aware of that.

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#37
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not in small part thanks to social science. I'm genuinely curious what you are referring to here?

My, admittedly limited, understanding of current social science theory seems to claim more and more that boundaries of race, class, gender etc are real boundaries that preclude identification and understanding. I identify with men, because I am a man, I can't possibly understand a woman's point of view for the same reason. We are encouraged to believe in privileged positions where knowledge is spesific to this positi…

You seem to be thinking of gender studies? I don't know much about that, especially in the US. It may be right to criticize that field and its methodology. Social science, however, also includes fields like psychology, history and law, all of which I assume you'd agree are hugely important for society.

Also, as I've mentioned in another comment, the article is not advocating for computer science and social sciences to 'become the same', but to improve communication and mutual appreciation and knowledge. (The title is a bit unfortunate.)

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to avoid generic phrases like "causing harm". "Google is the champion of circumventing long established norms, such as the prohibition on wiretapping, and evading responsibility for doing so" says a lot more than "causing harm".

Blaming Google for that is some bizzare history retconning bullshit. You want the DHS, FBI, CIA, and NSA for that. Calling Google wiretapping would be like calling your bank a wiretapper because they log every transaction. Those previously listed bad actors with badges agencies doing so would be business as usual. It is utterly exasperating to see "Big Tech" magically become the magnet for blame of things they don't…

Your hostility is a little weird. Maybe you think *.gov are worse and should be mentioned before Google. That is a legitimate position to have.

On the other hand, Google drove surveillance vans all over the world, hoovered up people's home network wifi frames, and promoted the engineer who "accidentally" introduced that "bug". If that isn't circumventing a norm against wiretapping, I'm not sure what is.

Re: Computing belongs within the social sciences

#40
Looks like STEMvy acting up again - trouble with jobs in sector again? My mind may be frayed cynical but this bears resemblence to the same old bullshit of previous decades of academics politics; trying to bully their way onto the gravytrain while calling it "interdisciplinary" but only adding one STEM course at best while treating them as the well of all evils in the world, something they should certainly know better than given evil long predates the accused. The "Science wars" for one. I guess it is time for shitty remakes again there too.

Seriously, there is the same pattern of vague claims to benefits, one-sided elective requirements while poisoning the well to call anyone who disagrees with them close-minded and evil. Sadly/fortunately interdisciplinary never explicitly teaches this sort of bullshitting. Sadly because it could be useful in these fights, fortunately because we are all better off with a minimium of this crap wasting our lives.

Post reply on HN