5 ms·

You appear to have already made up your mind about the issue. It's going to be rather hard for you to see why there may be a problem when it depends on some ass

You appear to have already made up your mind about the issue. It's going to be rather hard for you to see why there may be a problem when it depends on some assumptions you've already rejected: > If you've passed advanced mathematics and are lost in basic programming, CS probably isn't the best profession. I think you're vastly underestimating the benefit of preparation, especially an advanced form of thereof. CS may also require more preparation than other fields do due to its inherent unintuitiveness. The gap between those who dabbled enough to get the basics and those who have never seen it before is rather large. CS 101 is not basic. Even a high school CS class is not basic. Especially at some places. You're lacking perspective here. > I cannot for the life of me grasp this insistence that we have equal representation across all professions from both genders. It turns out males and females literally have difference chemical make-ups and gravitate towards different professions naturally. Many people are not ready to simply accept the latter conclusion because of recent history. Most of those people are similar to the same people who have found that kind of conclusion to be false previously.

tw04 10y ago
>CS 101 is not basic. Even a high school CS class is not basic. Especially at some places. You're lacking perspective here. I had literally 0 CS prior to college. I am not a programmer and have no desire to ever be one and I would likely be a mediocre programmer at best if forced to do so for a living - CS101 was literally the easiest class I had in college. If you're claiming it's not basic I guess we're just at an impasse. I have NEVER met a person who failed out of CS101 and had any place trying to become a professional programmer. I assume you have statistics backing up this wide swath of the population who have failed out of CS101 due to a lack of previous experience who have gone on to be successful programmers? If not, you are making such a massive leap of faith - you're right, I can't get there. As for the conclusion, based on what? You've got scientific evidence proving the chemical make-up of men and women are identical? You're rejecting... reality? I assume you're advocating millions of dollars be pledged towards the funding of a program to increase the population of male nurses, correct?
- projektir 10y ago
  > I had literally 0 CS prior to college. I am not a programmer and have no desire to ever be one and I would likely be a mediocre programmer at best if forced to do so for a living - CS101 was literally the easiest class I had in college. What exactly does 0 CS mean? If you've never picked up a programming book that doesn't mean you had 0 CS exposure, 0 CS exposure is if you've never seen a computer and never reasoned about a logical system. Extremely rare among programmers yet actually not at all uncommon among many people I grew up around. If CS is so basic, why are there so many people who can't understand for loops? How often do we kick a person to the curb if they can't immediately understand simple algebra or don't instantly figure out how to read? Is simple algebra basic? Is reading basic? How long do those take? How hard it is to teach reading to a person who has never read? Among those who have never read, are there going to be a few who'll pick it up quickly anyway? It seems you consider it simple because it was simple for you. Maybe you got the one 101 CS class that was actually reasonable? "CS 101" isn't a monolith, there are many of them across colleges and programs, and some programs have improved on the matter. > I have NEVER met a person who failed out of CS101 and had any place trying to become a professional programmer. Well, that's kind of a self-biasing conclusion, isn't it? And it's not going to be very encouraging to any kind of person to fail a 101 class in a field. I don't trust any one person to decide who has a place to become a professional programmer so I don't see that as any sort of evidence or an argument. People not being able to see potential in other people is old news. In every CS class I've been in there was a huge disparity between those who have coded before and those who haven't, and it was only greater in the earlier classes. That disparity was not replicated in other classes. Those who have coded before could effectively do nothing and pass the class with flying colors while the rest barely scraped by. I have taken multiple high school CS classes due to school jumping and every single CS class had this effect. No, not hard evidence, but something you don't seem to be mentioning at all, and I've heard similar reports from lots of people. > You've got scientific evidence proving the chemical make-up of men and women are identical? We're not discussing whether or not they're identical and never where. We're discussing whether or not they completely and utterly explain the current gender disparity. That we do not know and will not truly know for a very long time. Assigning various things to gender differences has a very bad track record in history, which is why many of us will be skeptical of that easily available conclusion for quite some time, because there are other forces and motivations at play. I don't need to prove that something isn't true. The onus is on you to prove that it is true. You're generally not arguing in good faith, which, unfortunately, casts doubt on the sources of your convictions.

tw04 10y ago

>CS 101 is not basic. Even a high school CS class is not basic. Especially at some places. You're lacking perspective here. I had literally 0 CS prior to college. I am not a programmer and have no desire to ever be one and I would likely be a mediocre programmer at best if forced to do so for a living - CS101 was literally the easiest class I had in college. If you're claiming it's not basic I guess we're just at an impasse. I have NEVER met a person who failed out of CS101 and had any place trying to become a professional programmer. I assume you have statistics backing up this wide swath of the population who have failed out of CS101 due to a lack of previous experience who have gone on to be successful programmers? If not, you are making such a massive leap of faith - you're right, I can't get there. As for the conclusion, based on what? You've got scientific evidence proving the chemical make-up of men and women are identical? You're rejecting... reality? I assume you're advocating millions of dollars be pledged towards the funding of a program to increase the population of male nurses, correct?

projektir 10y ago
> I had literally 0 CS prior to college. I am not a programmer and have no desire to ever be one and I would likely be a mediocre programmer at best if forced to do so for a living - CS101 was literally the easiest class I had in college. What exactly does 0 CS mean? If you've never picked up a programming book that doesn't mean you had 0 CS exposure, 0 CS exposure is if you've never seen a computer and never reasoned about a logical system. Extremely rare among programmers yet actually not at all uncommon among many people I grew up around. If CS is so basic, why are there so many people who can't understand for loops? How often do we kick a person to the curb if they can't immediately understand simple algebra or don't instantly figure out how to read? Is simple algebra basic? Is reading basic? How long do those take? How hard it is to teach reading to a person who has never read? Among those who have never read, are there going to be a few who'll pick it up quickly anyway? It seems you consider it simple because it was simple for you. Maybe you got the one 101 CS class that was actually reasonable? "CS 101" isn't a monolith, there are many of them across colleges and programs, and some programs have improved on the matter. > I have NEVER met a person who failed out of CS101 and had any place trying to become a professional programmer. Well, that's kind of a self-biasing conclusion, isn't it? And it's not going to be very encouraging to any kind of person to fail a 101 class in a field. I don't trust any one person to decide who has a place to become a professional programmer so I don't see that as any sort of evidence or an argument. People not being able to see potential in other people is old news. In every CS class I've been in there was a huge disparity between those who have coded before and those who haven't, and it was only greater in the earlier classes. That disparity was not replicated in other classes. Those who have coded before could effectively do nothing and pass the class with flying colors while the rest barely scraped by. I have taken multiple high school CS classes due to school jumping and every single CS class had this effect. No, not hard evidence, but something you don't seem to be mentioning at all, and I've heard similar reports from lots of people. > You've got scientific evidence proving the chemical make-up of men and women are identical? We're not discussing whether or not they're identical and never where. We're discussing whether or not they completely and utterly explain the current gender disparity. That we do not know and will not truly know for a very long time. Assigning various things to gender differences has a very bad track record in history, which is why many of us will be skeptical of that easily available conclusion for quite some time, because there are other forces and motivations at play. I don't need to prove that something isn't true. The onus is on you to prove that it is true. You're generally not arguing in good faith, which, unfortunately, casts doubt on the sources of your convictions.