3 ms·

You know, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always viewed a true science as something held the scientific method at its core. So the big test for me is whether co

by PakG1 16y ago

You know, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always viewed a true science as something held the scientific method at its core. So the big test for me is whether computer scientists apply the scientific method. And to be honest, I can't think of many examples where people rigorously chase a problem using the scientific method. From Wikipedia, in case anyone's unfamiliar: 1. Define the question 2. Gather information and resources (observe) 3. Form hypothesis 4. Perform experiment and collect data 5. Analyze data 6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis 7. Publish results 8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists) How many people do this other than maybe to try and solve P=NP? edit: formatting

jamii 16y ago
That sounds very much like the debugging process in an open source project.
- PakG1 16y ago
  Debugging a program is slightly different from trying to understand the nature of the world, no? I suppose that's the other major criteria I tend to use when thinking about scientists.
  - jamii 16y ago
    Sure, I'm just comparing the methods. I think its interesting that as software systems become more complex that scientific methods become more and more useful.
  - bkudria 16y ago
    Who cares about the nature of the world when you can explore the nature of the machine?