Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#1

Post by jxub » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 11:48 PM UTC

Computer science as a lost art (2015)
rubyhacker.com

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#2

Post by anfilt » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 12:44 AM UTC

He calls it a rant, but I would say its just being honest.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#3

Post by tabtab » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 12:54 AM UTC

As soon as higher-level programming languages such as COBOL, Algol, and FORTRAN came out; many clerks in the mid 1960's onward learned programming without knowing about the hardware guts or theory. Thus, the layering of specialties had already begun.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#4

Post by wrs » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:10 AM UTC

Well stated.

I recently went through (the recordings of) MIT’s intro course for electrical engineers, in which somewhere the professor says students may wonder why they have to do all this calculus and learn FET models and so on — in real life don’t you just wire chips together? And he points out that MIT degrees are for the people who make the chips.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#5

Post by frostburg » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:15 AM UTC

tabtab wrote: post #3

As soon as higher-level programming languages such as COBOL, Algol, and FORTRAN came out; many clerks in the mid 1960's onward learned programming without knowing about the hardware guts or theory. Thus, the layering of specialties had already begun.

I'm not that sold on this. Programming in ASM isn't really "harder" than programming in Haskell, it's just slower - it requires discipline, but not the ability to grasp abstraction that some more modern languages need.

I think that issues like knowing "how do compilers actually work" or "this thing is actually the halting problem, let's stop" are more relevant than how removed from latches and memory controllers one is.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#6

Post by fru311 » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:21 AM UTC

I would suggest that if someone isn't interested in technical fundamentals, they should consider a degree in human computer interaction and design. The things you can create with shallow technical knowledge continue to become more commoditized, but understanding problems that people have and designing a solution that makes them happy is a good way to create value.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#7

Post by yontherubicon » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:25 AM UTC

So, for the dogshed builders among us, what might be the recommended pathway to learn some architecture--beyond the obvious academic options?

I'm sure this has been covered to death on HN already, but if anyone has a link bookmarked and feels like sharing?

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#8

Post by avmich » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

yontherubicon wrote: post #7

So, for the dogshed builders among us, what might be the recommended pathway to learn some architecture--beyond the obvious academic options? I'm sure this has been covered to death on HN already, but if anyone has a link bookmarked and feels like sharing?

Read carefully "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" (e.g. online for free), preferably do exercises. You'll get a solid start.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#9

Post by supermdguy » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:32 AM UTC

frostburg wrote: post #5

tabtab wrote: post #3

As soon as higher-level programming languages such as COBOL, Algol, and FORTRAN came out; many clerks in the mid 1960's onward learned programming without knowing about the hardware guts or theory. Thus, the layering of specialties had already begun.

I'm not that sold on this. Programming in ASM isn't really "harder" than programming in Haskell, it's just slower - it requires discipline, but not the ability to grasp abstraction that some more modern languages need. I think that issues like knowing "how do compilers actually work" or "this thing is actually the halting problem, let's stop" are more relevant than how removed from latches and memory controllers one…

> Programming in ASM isn't really "harder" than programming in Haskell, it's just slower - it requires discipline, but not the ability to grasp abstraction that some more modern languages need.

Reminds me of this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17403233

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#10

Post by galeaspablo » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 1:34 AM UTC

yontherubicon wrote: post #7

So, for the dogshed builders among us, what might be the recommended pathway to learn some architecture--beyond the obvious academic options? I'm sure this has been covered to death on HN already, but if anyone has a link bookmarked and feels like sharing?

https://teachyourselfcs.com/

I didn’t do CS in university. Following the above got me up to speed. I’ve seen it several times on HN. This time it’s me promoting it.