3 ms·

With respect, I think the author confuses the roles of specialization and generalization. There are general skills within the domain of Computer Science that ca

With respect, I think the author confuses the roles of specialization and generalization. There are general skills within the domain of Computer Science that can be applied to other fields. Just like there are general skills from Statistics that apply across other fields, or general skills from English, or general skills from various disciplines of Mathematics. One can apply these skills across disciplines without needing to specialize, per se, in the discipline from which the skill derives. Alternatively, one can decide that the skill's parent discipline is worth specializing in. If I'm a Biology major, and I discover that I am getting a kick out of the Statistics skills I employ in my major, even more so than I enjoy my major, I can decide to major in Statistics instead. This does not obviate the need for the two fields as separate fields of study. Nor does it present any real indication that one field is going to be collapsed into the other. The sets of Biology and Statistics have many intersections, but they are not the same set. And that's the key: the fields are intersecting, and occasionally even overlapping, but they're not entirely so. At the risk of sounding even nerdier, maybe this concept comes more naturally to those of us who've played an RPG or two in our day. Think Skyrim, if you've played it. You can build a melee fighter who draws a few skills from the magic skill tree. Or you can be a pure mage. Or a pure fighter. Or what have you. At the same time, there are only so many skill points you're allotted -- so you can't pick all of each tree. It works the same way in life, really. It's probably better to be a master of one trade with a few skills from the others, than to be a jack of all trades and master of none. This has been my daily admission of dorkitude. Thanks for listening.

thedeuce 14y ago
this author is always confused, he commonly posts jibberish that gets spammed here.
aangjie 14y ago
While i agree with your point, i think the article(as a whole) doesn't really contradict with your argument. It does presume(nay project) that at some point in the timeline of mankind CS departments will perish. but my imagination tells me that would not be because people don't study it, but rather because there is not enough funding(as dictated by the economy) to support a separate dept. for computer science. Note that doesn't say anything about the scope of work, or scope for the subject to revolutionize the world/science as we(mankind/humanity/perhaps even transhumans :-P ) know at that instant in the timeline. So unless you think it follows from your argument that CS, will never reach a position to be considered by a majority of population to be undeserving a separate department, i don't see a conflict at all. That's all i have to show off my nerdiness..:-P
- jonnathanson 14y ago
  I think that's fair, and well said. But I guess I just don't think that day will come. There will always be people who want to specialize in CS -- in the actual science of computers, and not just coding -- and these people will be different from the people who want to code, but don't want to get too deep into the weeds in the theory. Perhaps we'll see a day where CS and programming are separated out, and CS becomes a purely theoretical discipline, while programming is more like "Applied" CS. It's my understanding that this is already happening at some schools. But I don't think CS is in danger of disappearing as a distinct discipline. I could be wrong, obviously, and I am not steeped heavily enough in the politics and ways of the world of academia to know for sure how these things go. But the fundamental discipline seems pretty distinct from others, even others like it. In undergrad, for instance, I had the great fortune to take a CS class from Dr. David Gelernter. We didn't touch a single line of code in that entire semester, but I learned more about the fundamentals of computers than I have in any other class. Conversely, I had friends in the class who were bored to tears, or frustrated to kingdom come, by the subject matter -- who found the whole class impractical and not immediately useful. The phrase "intellectual masturbation" was tossed around pretty frequently. But honestly, different strokes for different folks. And that fact will keep CS alive and distinct.
  - justincormack 14y ago
    Is there a "science" of computers? Not sure its science, maybe it is Maths? Or a part of Physics?

thedeuce 14y ago

this author is always confused, he commonly posts jibberish that gets spammed here.

aangjie 14y ago

While i agree with your point, i think the article(as a whole) doesn't really contradict with your argument. It does presume(nay project) that at some point in the timeline of mankind CS departments will perish. but my imagination tells me that would not be because people don't study it, but rather because there is not enough funding(as dictated by the economy) to support a separate dept. for computer science. Note that doesn't say anything about the scope of work, or scope for the subject to revolutionize the world/science as we(mankind/humanity/perhaps even transhumans :-P ) know at that instant in the timeline. So unless you think it follows from your argument that CS, will never reach a position to be considered by a majority of population to be undeserving a separate department, i don't see a conflict at all. That's all i have to show off my nerdiness..:-P

jonnathanson 14y ago
I think that's fair, and well said. But I guess I just don't think that day will come. There will always be people who want to specialize in CS -- in the actual science of computers, and not just coding -- and these people will be different from the people who want to code, but don't want to get too deep into the weeds in the theory. Perhaps we'll see a day where CS and programming are separated out, and CS becomes a purely theoretical discipline, while programming is more like "Applied" CS. It's my understanding that this is already happening at some schools. But I don't think CS is in danger of disappearing as a distinct discipline. I could be wrong, obviously, and I am not steeped heavily enough in the politics and ways of the world of academia to know for sure how these things go. But the fundamental discipline seems pretty distinct from others, even others like it. In undergrad, for instance, I had the great fortune to take a CS class from Dr. David Gelernter. We didn't touch a single line of code in that entire semester, but I learned more about the fundamentals of computers than I have in any other class. Conversely, I had friends in the class who were bored to tears, or frustrated to kingdom come, by the subject matter -- who found the whole class impractical and not immediately useful. The phrase "intellectual masturbation" was tossed around pretty frequently. But honestly, different strokes for different folks. And that fact will keep CS alive and distinct.
- justincormack 14y ago
  Is there a "science" of computers? Not sure its science, maybe it is Maths? Or a part of Physics?