5 ms·

Assume quantum computers become mainstream or any other technological evolution? crazy to imagine I know, but that has been the tendency.

ChrisLomont 4y ago
The tendency for a good 50 years is a Master's degree will return a significantly higher expected lifetime of earnings.
- sirmoveon 4y ago
  You make it into any exclusive club in society and you will also enjoy more benefits than the average person in society.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    So... It's not declining?
    - astrange 4y ago
      If it's positional, it will decline as soon as more people try doing it.
  - Hermitian909 4y ago
    In CS, a lot of the knowledge that is very valuable today was discovered years ago and is taught well in Master's programs. As a concrete example, I know some great database developers making >1 million a year because of their expertise. They tell me the vast majority of knowledge the apply at work was discovered in the 80s. They're up to date on newer stuff, but it's just not what gets used. Could that all be invalidated by some new hype technology? Possibly, but even then it would be decades before these older systems are ripped out. I think you're imagining a much more rapid change in technology than usually happens. Heck, I knew someone who's masters was focused on vacuum tubes and graduated the year the semi-conductor was invented. This was one of the more rapid seismic technical shifts in history and it still allowed him to have a long lucrative career with legacy systems. I wouldn't worry about CS knowledge being outdated anytime soon.
    - sirmoveon 4y ago
      Academia will always try to teach the best way around a problem. So, you won't see academia, in an updated program, trying to teach these old ways, eventhough there's still going to be a market for legacy technology. They will usually be highly profitable for that same reason.
astrange 4y ago
Quantum computers don't obsolete CS. They're a kind of coprocessor like GPUs and can't do most tasks faster than classical computers (or, actually, at all). I did specialize in "AI" in undergrad a year before deep learning was discovered and so most of what I learned about genetic algorithms/K-means/MCMC turns out to be kind of useless, but oh well.
- kaba0 4y ago
  Deep learning was discovered decades before that (depending on when you graduated). It just wasn’t feasible with the hardware at time.
  - astrange 4y ago
    Can't say my professor thought much of it at the time. I did have to actually learn statistics though, which should put me at an advantage over ML engineers if I get back into it…
alistairSH 4y ago
Quantum computers still need programming. They still need to interface other hardware. Etc.

ChrisLomont 4y ago

The tendency for a good 50 years is a Master's degree will return a significantly higher expected lifetime of earnings.

sirmoveon 4y ago
You make it into any exclusive club in society and you will also enjoy more benefits than the average person in society.
- cinntaile 4y ago
  So... It's not declining?
  - astrange 4y ago
    If it's positional, it will decline as soon as more people try doing it.
- Hermitian909 4y ago
  In CS, a lot of the knowledge that is very valuable today was discovered years ago and is taught well in Master's programs. As a concrete example, I know some great database developers making >1 million a year because of their expertise. They tell me the vast majority of knowledge the apply at work was discovered in the 80s. They're up to date on newer stuff, but it's just not what gets used. Could that all be invalidated by some new hype technology? Possibly, but even then it would be decades before these older systems are ripped out. I think you're imagining a much more rapid change in technology than usually happens. Heck, I knew someone who's masters was focused on vacuum tubes and graduated the year the semi-conductor was invented. This was one of the more rapid seismic technical shifts in history and it still allowed him to have a long lucrative career with legacy systems. I wouldn't worry about CS knowledge being outdated anytime soon.
  - sirmoveon 4y ago
    Academia will always try to teach the best way around a problem. So, you won't see academia, in an updated program, trying to teach these old ways, eventhough there's still going to be a market for legacy technology. They will usually be highly profitable for that same reason.

astrange 4y ago

Quantum computers don't obsolete CS. They're a kind of coprocessor like GPUs and can't do most tasks faster than classical computers (or, actually, at all). I did specialize in "AI" in undergrad a year before deep learning was discovered and so most of what I learned about genetic algorithms/K-means/MCMC turns out to be kind of useless, but oh well.

kaba0 4y ago
Deep learning was discovered decades before that (depending on when you graduated). It just wasn’t feasible with the hardware at time.
- astrange 4y ago
  Can't say my professor thought much of it at the time. I did have to actually learn statistics though, which should put me at an advantage over ML engineers if I get back into it…

alistairSH 4y ago

Quantum computers still need programming. They still need to interface other hardware. Etc.