> I reckon that I could've finished my BSc in Computer Science in probably half the time required. I attended only about 2 weeks of lectures per semester, gener

> I reckon that I could've finished my BSc in Computer Science in probably half the time required. I attended only about 2 weeks of lectures per semester, generally didn't start assignments more than a week before they were due, and didn't study more than about 3 days before the exam. Something seems to be missing from your reasoning. What were you doing the rest of the time and beforehand? Are you sure it didn't involve computer science related activities? This would mean no reading blogs, HN, programming, no math puzzles, and also no toying with advanced computer use like IT related things. That's the first requirement, otherwise you already spent a lot of time and effort learning comp sci. The other requirement I see for your reasoning to hold true, is that none of the downtime in between courses, exams and assignments was needed for your brain to process the info and absorb it, to relax and be ready for the next mental effort, and for your motivation to keep up and not get bored or distracted. There's also a third implicit, were you actually good and knowledgeable in comp sci, or just successful at passing your university's curriculum? If we suggest changing the system, we want it to produce equally or better qualified individuals. You mention that you've not followed the traditional route, and went at your own pace, which involved short bursts and big downtimes in between (presumably). Did this actually made you a better comp sci practitioner?