6 ms·

> you no longer learn relevant job skills and are expected to learn them in undergrad or post grad research outside of the courseload Colleges scoff at the ide

by teeray 3y ago

> you no longer learn relevant job skills and are expected to learn them in undergrad or post grad research outside of the courseload Colleges scoff at the idea of becoming "job training schools," but that is exactly what they need to be. The students are, overwhelming, there to "get a good job after college." Only a fraction of them will continue on to spend their entire career in academia.

ghaff 3y ago
The logic isn't that most students will go on to academic careers. It's that if students have a solid basis on the theory and other foundational basics of a field they can pick up a lot of the (often ephemeral) tooling/techniques/etc. on their own. If you want to argue that elite schools in particular often over-rotate on the theory and don't do enough to get students hand-on I won't really disagree with you. But there is a distinction from trade schools.
- Cheer2171 3y ago
  Yes. At my CS program, there was a saying that when someone asks you what programming languages or frameworks you know, you say "any", because you are being taught foundations that will let you pick up any language or framework that gets invented (barring some massive revolution in quantum computing or P=NP or whatever) Almost no CS major will get a job that will require them to write their own programming language and compiler from scratch. But having done that, I am way better off than if I spent that semester taking a bootcamp on the latest implementation details of the newest language or framework at the time, which is now obsolete.
  - brewdad 3y ago
    Sure, but how successful have you been getting a job requiring knowledge of Rust if you learned C++ in university? What about a more established language like Java if you happen to have little experience with it. The fact is modern companies don't want you to have the ability to acquire a new skill, they want you to have that skill on day one. This is even more true outside the programming realm. It's short sighted and counterproductive long term but when the next quarter's earnings are what matters, long term is but a an abstract concept.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      It's hard to answer in the general case. I think it's fair to say I've never been hired because of expertise in a narrow technology area.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      I learned java 7 in college, got a job writing java 7 transitioning to java 8, then spent 8 years writing python 3, which when I actually got the job I thought I hated python (I think it has some dumb choices and culture around it), and through some slow but definitive moves in that same company I "learned" java 8 to start working on a different project. I was expected to learn and become proficient in things like CSS and Javascript and HTML as well despite never taking a class on any of them. My degree taught me how computing works, from the theory to the logic gates to the math needed to interact with basics in the field. You know, companies used to spend money "training" their employees to do the things they needed to do. When computers first came around companies had to turn a mountain of secretaries into the very first programmers and computer administrators, and those mostly women bootstrapped the entire information economy. But that investment into human resources could better be spent on the CEOs private plane so they've spent the past 40 years bitching that "waaah waaah higher education doesn't make me cheap little worker bees waaah" as if you are entitled to free labor just because you "run" a business
    - lokar 3y ago
      What languages I already know has never been an issue, past my first couple years out of school. Similarly, in interviewing experienced candidates I don’t care which languages they happen to already know, I only want people who can learn whatever languages we decide to use.
    - Agingcoder 3y ago
      I hire people on a regular basis. I very much want people who have the ability to learn a new skill, and I work for a megacorp ( no faang ). Straight out of college, the hard truth is that you know virtually nothing, even if it sounds harsh ( and no you’re not a senior engineer after 3 years ). If I find someone who’s really good at c++ out of college, has started learning rust, wants to learn, and has good foundations, I’ll happily hire them.
  - hilux 3y ago
    In practice, in 2024, most companies want to hire programmers (and employees in general) who have done exactly this job before. Hiring for theoretical knowledge, hiring for abstract-reasoning skills, and then training ... sounds good in marketing collateral, but only the Googles of the world can afford to do it, and even Google may be changing their tune. (Of course, R1 faculty have never looked for an industry job in their lives.) If you don't believe me, look at some job listings.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      That's a pretty strong argument for people to not go to universities. But I'm not sure there's a lot of evidence that going to college is a terrible idea. And it hasn't been my experience at all. But code camps are always an option.
      - kjkjadksj 3y ago
        Not necessarily. Even though these job posting seek out experience with specific libraries over general theoretical knowledge, they often still require a four year degree for reasons known only to HR.
  - Aurornis 3y ago
    > At my CS program, there was a saying that when someone asks you what programming languages or frameworks you know, you say "any", because you are being taught foundations that will let you pick up any language or framework that gets invented (barring some massive revolution in quantum computing or P=NP or whatever) This is the kind of thing that sounds great within the purely abstract world of an academic bubble, but falls apart at first contact with reality. It's important to learn the foundations, but that shouldn't be treated as mutually exclusive with learning practical skills.
  - P_I_Staker 3y ago
    I have no idea what you're talking about. You better have done exactly all this stuff exactly before and I will shower you with money, otherwise I'm angry you were even allowed into the building!
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    At the same time computer science programs would probably do a better service teaching you these things in an actual real language instead of their stupid in house dialect of Java. Most of the gotchas and productivity blocks in programming aren’t from theoretical shortcomings but unfamiliarity with some stupid piece of syntax.
lokar 3y ago
I found the (looked down on) “skills” parts of my CS degree to be somewhat helpful the first couple years as I got started. The overwhelming value has been in theory, critical thinking and math/engineering formalism throughout my career.
- ragall 3y ago
  I found an old thread where you said you said "K8S fixes many many serious issues in Borg that are mostly unfixable at this point (I worked on Borg for many years), it's better in many ways" I would be very interested in hearing more about that. Would you mind contacting me at radakan@fastmail.net ? Thanks.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kjkjadksj 3y ago
Speaking from my experience in stem even then they don’t train you at all for graduate school even if you aced undergrad. GPA no longer matters at that level and as such what few required classes you have are easy A seminar style classes where they make someone in the dept opine on whatever they are working on for a few weeks a semester. The skills you actually need are manuscript writing. Being able to read a dozen scientific articles a day and gleam what they are saying accurately. Being able to convert that into presentations for other people. Using existing knowledge to develop a research proposal that’s actually topical or relevant to the field today. People don’t get that experience, at most a training wheels on sort of manuscript project in undergrad where you cite 5 things and only your TA is reading it, not peer review. As such for most people, the first few years of PhD are basically spent spinning your wheels in the mud until you gather enough of these untaught soft skills to actually produce work. So if you consider the whole undergrad plus these first few years lost in the wilderness in gradschool, its like 7 of your best years gone down the drain because the training system for decades has been “figure it out.” Even as bad as today is, its still a little bit better than a few decades ago when people were spending even longer faffing about in PhD programs on average.

by teeray 3y ago

ghaff 3y ago

The logic isn't that most students will go on to academic careers. It's that if students have a solid basis on the theory and other foundational basics of a field they can pick up a lot of the (often ephemeral) tooling/techniques/etc. on their own. If you want to argue that elite schools in particular often over-rotate on the theory and don't do enough to get students hand-on I won't really disagree with you. But there is a distinction from trade schools.

Cheer2171 3y ago
Yes. At my CS program, there was a saying that when someone asks you what programming languages or frameworks you know, you say "any", because you are being taught foundations that will let you pick up any language or framework that gets invented (barring some massive revolution in quantum computing or P=NP or whatever) Almost no CS major will get a job that will require them to write their own programming language and compiler from scratch. But having done that, I am way better off than if I spent that semester taking a bootcamp on the latest implementation details of the newest language or framework at the time, which is now obsolete.
- brewdad 3y ago
  Sure, but how successful have you been getting a job requiring knowledge of Rust if you learned C++ in university? What about a more established language like Java if you happen to have little experience with it. The fact is modern companies don't want you to have the ability to acquire a new skill, they want you to have that skill on day one. This is even more true outside the programming realm. It's short sighted and counterproductive long term but when the next quarter's earnings are what matters, long term is but a an abstract concept.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    It's hard to answer in the general case. I think it's fair to say I've never been hired because of expertise in a narrow technology area.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    I learned java 7 in college, got a job writing java 7 transitioning to java 8, then spent 8 years writing python 3, which when I actually got the job I thought I hated python (I think it has some dumb choices and culture around it), and through some slow but definitive moves in that same company I "learned" java 8 to start working on a different project. I was expected to learn and become proficient in things like CSS and Javascript and HTML as well despite never taking a class on any of them. My degree taught me how computing works, from the theory to the logic gates to the math needed to interact with basics in the field. You know, companies used to spend money "training" their employees to do the things they needed to do. When computers first came around companies had to turn a mountain of secretaries into the very first programmers and computer administrators, and those mostly women bootstrapped the entire information economy. But that investment into human resources could better be spent on the CEOs private plane so they've spent the past 40 years bitching that "waaah waaah higher education doesn't make me cheap little worker bees waaah" as if you are entitled to free labor just because you "run" a business
  - lokar 3y ago
    What languages I already know has never been an issue, past my first couple years out of school. Similarly, in interviewing experienced candidates I don’t care which languages they happen to already know, I only want people who can learn whatever languages we decide to use.
  - Agingcoder 3y ago
    I hire people on a regular basis. I very much want people who have the ability to learn a new skill, and I work for a megacorp ( no faang ). Straight out of college, the hard truth is that you know virtually nothing, even if it sounds harsh ( and no you’re not a senior engineer after 3 years ). If I find someone who’s really good at c++ out of college, has started learning rust, wants to learn, and has good foundations, I’ll happily hire them.
- hilux 3y ago
  In practice, in 2024, most companies want to hire programmers (and employees in general) who have done exactly this job before. Hiring for theoretical knowledge, hiring for abstract-reasoning skills, and then training ... sounds good in marketing collateral, but only the Googles of the world can afford to do it, and even Google may be changing their tune. (Of course, R1 faculty have never looked for an industry job in their lives.) If you don't believe me, look at some job listings.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    That's a pretty strong argument for people to not go to universities. But I'm not sure there's a lot of evidence that going to college is a terrible idea. And it hasn't been my experience at all. But code camps are always an option.
    - kjkjadksj 3y ago
      Not necessarily. Even though these job posting seek out experience with specific libraries over general theoretical knowledge, they often still require a four year degree for reasons known only to HR.
- Aurornis 3y ago
  > At my CS program, there was a saying that when someone asks you what programming languages or frameworks you know, you say "any", because you are being taught foundations that will let you pick up any language or framework that gets invented (barring some massive revolution in quantum computing or P=NP or whatever) This is the kind of thing that sounds great within the purely abstract world of an academic bubble, but falls apart at first contact with reality. It's important to learn the foundations, but that shouldn't be treated as mutually exclusive with learning practical skills.
- P_I_Staker 3y ago
  I have no idea what you're talking about. You better have done exactly all this stuff exactly before and I will shower you with money, otherwise I'm angry you were even allowed into the building!
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  At the same time computer science programs would probably do a better service teaching you these things in an actual real language instead of their stupid in house dialect of Java. Most of the gotchas and productivity blocks in programming aren’t from theoretical shortcomings but unfamiliarity with some stupid piece of syntax.

lokar 3y ago

I found the (looked down on) “skills” parts of my CS degree to be somewhat helpful the first couple years as I got started. The overwhelming value has been in theory, critical thinking and math/engineering formalism throughout my career.

ragall 3y ago
I found an old thread where you said you said "K8S fixes many many serious issues in Borg that are mostly unfixable at this point (I worked on Borg for many years), it's better in many ways" I would be very interested in hearing more about that. Would you mind contacting me at radakan@fastmail.net ? Thanks.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

kjkjadksj 3y ago

Speaking from my experience in stem even then they don’t train you at all for graduate school even if you aced undergrad. GPA no longer matters at that level and as such what few required classes you have are easy A seminar style classes where they make someone in the dept opine on whatever they are working on for a few weeks a semester. The skills you actually need are manuscript writing. Being able to read a dozen scientific articles a day and gleam what they are saying accurately. Being able to convert that into presentations for other people. Using existing knowledge to develop a research proposal that’s actually topical or relevant to the field today. People don’t get that experience, at most a training wheels on sort of manuscript project in undergrad where you cite 5 things and only your TA is reading it, not peer review. As such for most people, the first few years of PhD are basically spent spinning your wheels in the mud until you gather enough of these untaught soft skills to actually produce work. So if you consider the whole undergrad plus these first few years lost in the wilderness in gradschool, its like 7 of your best years gone down the drain because the training system for decades has been “figure it out.” Even as bad as today is, its still a little bit better than a few decades ago when people were spending even longer faffing about in PhD programs on average.