You must be good at Math
-
How?
Again, legit question.
If you write them yourself. Then you actually need a bit of math.
But claiming that you need math skills as a programmer because some kinds of programs need you to know maths is like claiming every programmer needs to know a lot about logistics because some people write software for warehouses.
-
Had a graduate Dev who did not have a fucking clue about anything computer related. How tf he passed his degree I have no idea.
Basic programming principles? No clue. Data structures? Nope.
We were once having a discussion about the limitations of transistors and dude's like "what's a transistor?" ~_~#
Could be a case of bad memory. Solved the exams and forgot everything in the next hour.
-
Tbh, as a dev knowledge of transistors is about as essential as knowledge about screws for a car driver.
It's common knowledge and in general maybe a little shameful to not know, but it's really not in any way relevant for the task at hand.
Maybe for dev knowledge, but computer science? The science of computers?
-
This post did not contain any content.
I mean, I am applying various kinds of science but I'm not actually doing any science so I'm not thinking about myself as a scientist. What I do is solving problems - I'm an engineer.
-
Maybe for dev knowledge, but computer science? The science of computers?
Well, computer science is not the science of computers, is it? It's about using computers (in the sense of programming them), not about making computers. Making computers is electrical engineering.
We all know how great we IT people are at naming things
-
Well, computer science is not the science of computers, is it? It's about using computers (in the sense of programming them), not about making computers. Making computers is electrical engineering.
We all know how great we IT people are at naming things
Informatics is a much better name imo
-
Maybe for dev knowledge, but computer science? The science of computers?
If you want someone to know about the physical properties of transistors, find an electrical engineer.
-
The typical holder of a four-year degree from a decent university, whether it's in "computer science", "datalogy", "data science", or "informatics", learns about 3-5 programming languages at an introductory level and knows about programs, algorithms, data structures, and software engineering. Degrees usually require a bit of discrete maths too: sets, graphs, groups, and basic number theory. They do not necessarily know about computability theory: models & limits of computation; information theory: thresholds, tolerances, entropy, compression, machine learning; foundations for graphics, parsing, cryptography, or other essentials for the modern desktop.
For a taste of the difference, consider English WP's take on computability vs my recent rewrite of the esoteric-languages page, computable. Or compare WP's page on Conway's law to the nLab page which I wrote on Conway's law; it's kind of jaw-dropping that WP has the wrong quote for the law itself and gets the consequences wrong.
I meant the guy in the picture, but thanks anyway
-
If you want to know how computers work, do electrical engineering. If you want to know how electricity works, do physics. If you want to know how physics works, do mathematics. If you want to know how mathematics works, too bad, best you can do is think about the fact it works in philosophy.
If you want to know how philosophy works, do sociology...
It's kind of like a horseshoe with philosophy and math at the ends.
-
Maybe for dev knowledge, but computer science? The science of computers?
What kind of cs degree did you get where you learned about electrical circuits. The closest to hardware I've learned is logic circuit diagrams and verilog.
-
I have been coding since I was 10 years old. I have a CS degree and have been in professional IT for like 30 years. Started as a developer but I’m primarily hardware and architecture now. I have never ever said I was a computer scientist. That just sounds weird.
Yeah you’d really only say it on the theoretical side of things, I’ve definitely heard it in research and academia but even then people usually point to the particulars of their work first
-
What kind of cs degree did you get where you learned about electrical circuits. The closest to hardware I've learned is logic circuit diagrams and verilog.
I don't have a degree
-
If you want someone to know about the physical properties of transistors, find an electrical engineer.
Ok, but he didn't know what a transistor is. Like I get not knowing the mechanics or chemistry of it, but to literally not know it or how it applies to a computer boggles my mind.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
looks weird without the clevage
-
A senior firmware engineer said to the group that we just have to integrate the acceleration of an IMU to get velocity. I said “plus a constant.” I was fired for it.
That sounds like it might be a gift in disguise.
-
PID control is the classic example, but at a far enough abstraction any looping algorithm can be argued to be an implementation of the concepts underpinning calculus. If you're ever doing any statistical analysis or anything in game design having to do with motion, those are both calculus too. Data science is pure calculus, ground up and injected into your eyeballs, and any string manipulation or Regex is going to be built on lambda calculus (though a very correct argument can be made that literally all computer science is built of lambda calculus so that might be cheating to include it)
wrote last edited by [email protected]Lambda calculus has no relation to calculus calculus, though.
Data science is pure calculus, ground up and injected into your eyeballs
Lol, I like that. I mean, there's more calculus-y things, but it's kind of unusual in that you can't really interpret the non-calculus aspects of a neural net.
-
Lambda calculus has no relation to calculus calculus, though.
Data science is pure calculus, ground up and injected into your eyeballs
Lol, I like that. I mean, there's more calculus-y things, but it's kind of unusual in that you can't really interpret the non-calculus aspects of a neural net.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Lambda calculus has no relation to calculus calculus
I wanna fight your math teachers. No seriously, what did they tell you calculus is if it's got nothing in common with lambda calculus?
-
Lambda calculus has no relation to calculus calculus
I wanna fight your math teachers. No seriously, what did they tell you calculus is if it's got nothing in common with lambda calculus?
wrote last edited by [email protected]Is there some connection I've just been missing? It's a pretty straight rewriting system, it seems Newton wouldn't have had much use for it.
Lot's of things get called "calculus". Originally, calculus calculus was "the infinitesimal calculus" IIRC.
-
Is there some connection I've just been missing? It's a pretty straight rewriting system, it seems Newton wouldn't have had much use for it.
Lot's of things get called "calculus". Originally, calculus calculus was "the infinitesimal calculus" IIRC.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I think the issue here might be the overloading of terms - lambda calculus is both the system of notation and the common name for the conceptual underpinnings of computational theory. While there is little to no similarity between the abstracted study of change over a domain and a notational system, the idea of function composition or continuous function theory (or even just computation as a concept) are all closely related with basic concepts from "calculus calculus" like limit theory and integral progression.
edit: clarity
-
Wait til you see XNAND
My favorite was always XANEX
