11 ms·

Code != computer science

198 points by sarahallen 13y ago

fennecfoxen 13y ago
Yeah, a CS degree isn't suuuper-helpful for organizing a coherent program around a snazzy framework for the latest web technologies. It's for when you need to do something like, oh, "figure out how to upgrade the work-management system so you can move from coarse-grained lock system to a finer-grained lock system with zero downtime." Then you think back to your old courses covering Parallelism and the like, and plan it out.
j45 13y ago
Customers rarely care what we code or computer science in
- jrarredondo 13y ago
  Customers of any product rarely care what the people involved with the arts and sciences behind those product's creations do. That observation is not restricted to coding or comp sci.
  - j45 13y ago
    Yup, they just want to receive value (saving or making money/time) for using the product.
- PeterWhittaker 13y ago
  I don't know that I've ever been more torn about a comment than this one. I worked in both "core dev" and professional services development, and have seen what comes from well-architected software design, the sort of architecture that only experienced top-line CS graduates (or several-decades-worth-of-experience autodidacts or engineers) seem capable of producing (IMHO, YMWV)... ...and have seen many, many 1.0's, shelfware, etc. A CS grad from a top-flight school with excellent experience is worth their weight in gold, at least on teams of multiple people developing big systems - you want at least one, they will take care of data design, software architecture, etc., and likely cause your code to be more robust, more maintainable, etc. But motivated college grads (I'm Canadian, not sure what the US term would be), talented engineers, and autodidacts can crank out code like nobody's business. I don't know that I'd want to built a multi-year "core services" library out of it, but PoCs, MVPs, 1.0's, and demoware? Why not? And the top-flight CS grad might be wasted there. I'm torn because I care about quality, but really high quality only matters for the really long-lived system, the health-and-safety-critical system, and the system that must survive on its own with minimal human intervention and maintenance. Were I building a radiation control for healthcare, I would want electrical engineers and CS grads from top-flight systems. Ditto military avionics. If I was building apps, apps, apps, servers built atop well-architected OSS libraries, etc., I'd want code, fast, and I'd balance quality Vs lifetime to maximize profit, and probably hire less experienced, less well trained devs who "give good face", understand requirements, and code fast. The libraries themselves? Good question.... I don't have a conclusion. But j45 is right, customers don't care so much - but they don't want 3AM bugs, either. It's a trade-off.
  - j45 13y ago
    A few observations: - Being reasonably kind to your future self without over engineering or over architecting is the real skill of a talented developer/engineer in my eyes. - All software is like hardware, no matter how it's built, it has it's limits that will likely have to be revisited. - Customers not caring about which language/framework something is made in doesn't mean the code is automatically unkept or made carelessly. - Most languages and frameworks are pretty capable. All have their tradeoffs of what they uniquely provide vs give away. Very few projects will critically fail or succeed solely from the selection of a particular framework or language. - I'm not sure if you're connecting customers who don't care what language their system is built in, causing 3 AM bugs. If so: a) 3 AM bugs are not a cause of any particular language of framework or language, or the customer not caring about which one, but rather, the developer. b) Bugs are a reality on all platforms, and are best insulated against by a combination of process, policy and strategy that can be reasonably implemented in any stack. Ultimately, it's about how the user feels and the value that provided to them in solving a pain. Customer value is NOT the same value the developer provides themselves to make the developer's own life easier and somehow believing that all the build tools in the world will solve the customer's problem any better, or make a difference for the end user. It's not as often as it seems. Most languages and frameworks are capable of delivering delight if the developer spends time focussing on the user's pain and not just their own pains in their stack. Looking at how much value HN provides, it's not a function of it's language, framework, or coding. Maybe like inter-faith, i'm an inter-platform kind of guy as a polyglot and see the good everyone can be doing instead of dividing among syntactical philosophy that is indistinguishable to the users in the end.
sheetjs 13y ago
> Treehouse CEO Ryan Carson declares “A computer science degree is a rip off…I know because I have one.” Perhaps his CS degree was from a college which didn’t have a very good program or maybe his focus has been web development where you rarely need computer science. According to wikipedia: > In 2000, he graduated from Colorado State University with a Computer Science degree I suspect, like with most fields, that the school definitely matters (and that he may not have arrived at the same conclusion had he attended a school with a better CS program)
- analog31 13y ago
  I've noticed that the "degree is a rip off" comment crops up among graduates of practically every field from every school, equally from successful people and failures. So I'm not sure that I'd read much into it.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Colorado State is a major research university and has a pretty good CS program. I certainly wouldn't chalk his opinion up to a CS program that wasn't strong enough. I'd attribute it to the nature of web development versus more theoretically intensive problems.
- alayne 13y ago
  Well, for starters, he is a CEO not a CTO.
- cjf4 13y ago
  The key piece of context about this quote is that Ryan Carson has a vested interest in people deciding they do not need a computer science degree to code.
- walid 13y ago
  Well if you think of it, a CEO like Steve Jobs will call the PC a truck... to sell the iPad. • Computer Science = Truck • Treehouse = iPad But how do you make iPad dev tools?
  - 13y ago
jd007 13y ago
I've always thought of computer science as a branch of mathematics. To me coding or programming is applied (or engineering) computer science, it's an engineering field (hence the term software engineer). Just like there is theoretical physics (a basic science), and also applied/engineering physics (e.g. mechanical engineering). They are related fields, but specializing in one does not mean you will be good at the other (it certainly helps). The terms coding and computer science do get used interchangeably by a lot of people though, since most may not understand the difference. I've learned to live with it (occasionally I point out the difference, if I think the person misusing the terms actually cared to know).
- randomsearch 13y ago
  I would say some of Computer Science is mathematics. Mathematics is the foundation of Computer Science, but CS is not a branch of mathematics, although the origins of the field are found there. It is an important, core, part of the subject, but it does not entirely encompass it. For example, CS also includes Psychology, Graphic Design, social science, art, etc. Also, CS involves the teaching of programming, which is a craft (ignoring edge cases) - crafts cannot be taught through maths alone.
  - a_olt 13y ago
    Absolutely, CS is an inter-disciplinary subject.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
andrewfong 13y ago
Speaking from experience, this is true. You also don't really know when true CS is useful until you run into it. I graduated with the equivalent of a minor in CS. When I started coding for an web-based gaming start-up in 2007, it was mostly irrelevant. You don't need a CS degree to learn Ruby on Rails, nor is it necessarily useful (beyond your basic intro courses) to have taken CS courses. Flash-forward a year, after we raised our seed round. Our online game had grown in complexity quite a bit, and we found ourselves having to deal with things like complex image rendering, AI, and pathfinding. While it's possible to get a decent grasp of these topics through Google and O'Reilly books, it's definitely an order of magnitude more difficult than figuring out a new web framework. As mentioned before, I only have a minor in CS so my exposure to these topics was minimal, and there were definitely nights where I found myself wishing I had taken another AI or advanced algorithms course.
- eru 13y ago
  My difficulties were the other way round: knowing all the theory doesn't actually make you a better (or even a good) coder. Only when you run into the problems you mentioned, does academics help at all.
- jonny_eh 13y ago
  These "hardcore" problems like AI and pathfinding are definitely tough problems. The issue is that there's an infinite supply of such problems and there's no way a 4 year degree can cover them all. In fact, even if they did, most lessons would be forgotten before they could be proven useful in the real world. Why not just learn these areas when needed? Taking an Advanced AI course in just a 2-3 month semester is how many hours? Just spend a week or two hitting the books and you'll be good to go, and you're knowledge will be bleeding edge and up to date. Plus, you'll have been paid to learn it!
  - bello 13y ago
    While it's true that there is an "infinite supply of these problems", a good CS program it's supposed to teach you how to think, hence teaching you how to learn. If you have a very solid understanding of the fundamentals, you should be able to go and solve problems you've never seen before. If you don't, you could be stuck using other people's solutions to your problems, hence not being able to solve new ones that you might encounter.
tslathrow 13y ago
I did an undergrad in CS (Columbia) - in retrospect I should only have minored in CS. I'm not sure it's worth the workload! You will have _no_ free time and get reamed in GPA Very math-heavy and the project based classes were brutal.
- zhemao 13y ago
  I'm sure this depends a lot on what your preferences are. I just finished my undergrad in computer engineering at Columbia. I thought the project-based classes (and the vast amounts of work they entailed) were the most valuable parts of the program. Sure, you'd probably get higher grades if you just minored, but when it comes to hiring for software engineering jobs, companies tend to care more about what you know and what you've done than what your grades are. And you're more likely to know more about CS and have done more interesting projects if you have taken difficult project-based classes like operating systems, embedded systems, and programming languages and translators.
  - tslathrow 13y ago
    I will never forget OS 1... I still have nightmares
- woah 13y ago
  I would hope you enjoyed computer science! Learn up on the arts, politics, etc in your spare time. These are the fun subjects.
- dylandrop 13y ago
  I did undergrad CS @ Columbia as well. Of course you're not going to skate by as you would in insert-non-offensive-easy-major-name-here, but you learn a hell of a lot more. It's my personal belief that (especially in technical fields) you can't learn without putting a lot of hard work into something. But in doing so, you'll also keep yourself a step ahead of the curve in the job market. As per the article, plenty of people know how to code, not quite as many know CS. Also personally I felt like this is an exceptionally competitive major (as are sciences in general) but I'm sure that's true for other schools as well. It's okay to get a B -- you're being compared against other brilliant people and plenty of people would be lucky to hire you. This is probably the one piece of knowledge I would have told myself 3 years ago when I started it.
joelgrus 13y ago
computer science != a CS degree
- walid 13y ago
  hahaha that is a whole new can of worms... In my experience, mentors matter more than the course title. I've had the privilege of being taught by some of the best teachers and witnessed some of the worst. When your instructor deals with the course material as the sole purpose of a student being in class then the important lessons of computer science become nothing more than an exercise in regurgitation. However I've had my eyes opened by certain individuals who showed me what mathematics means in real life, how algorithms fail, why project management is important and how it's done and even how all coding has a mathematical basis (like SQL and compiler decisions). Personally my CS appreciation was a byproduct of being in the presence of these mentors rather than reading a book. They showed me the essence of the science. Mind you I love the books and still read my university books sometimes for fun, sometimes to brush up on the science after getting rusty.
catilac 13y ago
I think this distinction is incredibly crucial. There has been so much talk about how a CS degree is useless (and I for a moment bought that garbage as a holder of a CS degree), but it is completely untrue. As you work with more and more people in this industry, you frequently run into people without a degree, or, more importantly, no true know how, as I do stand by the fact that it's not required to have a degree to learn this stuff, who behave as if they are experts regardless of their poor mental model of how computers work. It's important for these people to know what they don't know. Reminding people that Code is not CS is a good way to make that happen.
FrankenPC 13y ago
When I was 16, I was obsessed with 3D graphics (hilariously primitive back 30 years ago). I learned programming to create , rotate, translate, and shade objects in 3D space. I learned computer science to understand how you manage vector lists, matrix math, and strange recursion algorithms. I learned that programming is computer science applied. Sort of like how math is a tool to apply calculus to real work problems. One won't work without the other. Saying "code != computer science" is a misrepresentation of the symbiotic process that's going on in the human mind. I think a fair statement is: programming(code) is the first level of computer science knowledge.
- zhemao 13y ago
  Isn't that exactly what the author is saying, though? He's saying that programming is part of computer science, but knowing how to code doesn't mean you know computer science.
  - FrankenPC 13y ago
    That's not what I'm saying. Saying "code" and "computer science" are two different things is a bit ridiculous.
mhogomchungu 13y ago
Fundamentally,computer science = data structures + algorithms. in a data structure class,you learn the basic structures like PODs,structs,vectors and linked lists. in algorithm class,you learn various basic sorting algorithms plus the big O notation and thats pretty much it. Then you will take a few physics classes,then chemistry classes,then maybe calculus one and two,then probably discrete mathematics class,one or two writing class,if you a lucky,maybe a single semester of operating system class. you may learn the basics on haskell in one class,the basic of java in another,maybe assembly in another class and you get your degree.Basically,you will leave school knowing only the basics of a bunch of things but not enough of anything. The above it how it felt to me as a CS major.
- kaplejon 13y ago
  My experience was similar to yours, though even more basic. I went for a 2-year degree at a community college, and it felt as though every course was a refresher in "This is a variable, and what a variable does. This is syntax, and syntax means…" Etc… It wasn't until getting into the "real world" that I realized the full value of my data structure courses. Those were the ones I kept returning to when trying to learn and understand new skills on the job. (Sadly, my 2-year degree didn't cover any algorithm learning.) So, now I have the advantage of a few years of "real world" experience to try and plot a course for how to get formal education on the remaining pieces that seem to actually have direct correlation to a career in computer programming. Not sure if it's a blessing or a curse for me, but I just have to keep moving forward.
- aleph_naught 13y ago
  People are incredulous when I tell them I use 90% of the stuff learned while getting my CS degree. Stuff I've done in the real world: AI: I've lost count of the number of times I've had to implement A* Graphics: wrote a ray tracer; matrix transformations Data structures and algorithms: wrote an approximation algorithm for the travelling salesman problem (christofides); fancier data structures like bloom-filters, lru caches; and just every day coding Databases: query optimization OS: Made me aware of systems (context switching, caching performance,...). Scheduling algorithms and how they affect the embedded software I write. Concurrent programming. Networking: Super helpful for everyday stuff when you understand the underlying principles. I've had to implement an RFC from scratch (DNS). Linear algebra: Used extensively in a path planner I wrote---with it I was able to reduce the state space by orders of magnitude compared to the standard grid approach. Statistics: wrote an online algorithm for adaptive windowed linear regression Even computability theory has been helpful, as it has strengthened my proving and reasoning skills---helping me find holes in requirements, or proving algorithms/invariants. Same with all the theoretical math courses I took (Analysis, Set Theory, First Order Logic ...) The list goes on... Above all, my CS degree taught me how to learn CS and beyond. Sometimes I worry about the potential solutions I am overlooking, because I never fully branched into the continuous domain (control theory, etc).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
woah 13y ago
I look at this from the other side as well. I've worked with brilliant people with ivy league CS degrees who wrote much messier and less maintainable code than me, an autodidact designer/js dev with 1.5 years of experience. Maybe I'm wrong, and there was something in their code that I wasn't seeing, but I don't think so. There can also be a bit of an attitude, like the person is thinking "of course this is good, I went to Stanford". But maybe that's my imagination. Another explanation is that these people are just so good that they are able to read messy and convoluted code no problem, and us mortals need to step up our game. On the other hand, these people would easily be able to reason about complex performance and security issues beyond me. I think that the hardcore CS issues are a science, while writing clean code in a web framework, browser, and API design is more of a craft. If you hire too many computer scientists, your code base could be full of fascinating technical tricks, but creaky and hard to work with. Too many craftsmen, and you'll get stuck on simple problems. It's a balance. EDIT: Downvotes? Please explain. Perhaps I am not able to fully comprehend the issues at hand.
- osdiab 13y ago
  I think people are falsely equating computer science with software engineering. You can get a very strong theoretical basis for programming at a place like Stanford, and the work you can do may have nothing to do with best practices but rather a lot to do with more abstract concepts like algorithmic efficiency or graph analysis or what not. As a Stanford student personally Ive learned a lot more about best practices in software systems outside of the university; in fact you get very little of that from classes. What you do get is in depth coverage of topics that most are unlikely to get a formal treatment of on their own, depending on your concentration, whether that means cutting edge operating systems and compilers research, or rigorous discussion of the psychology behind ux design. Hope that clarifies a bit!
  - natrius 13y ago
    Plus, there are some things that I don't believe can be taught effectively in college. Stanford told me tests were good, but I didn't really believe it until I had to work on a legacy codebase without tests. Best practices are easier to digest when you've experienced the problem they're meant to solve.
Bahamut 13y ago
The value of a degree is what you make of it. I think the most important aspect of college/grad school/etc. is that you have the opportunity to push the bounds of your mind. I spent 4 years in grad school for math at an excellent program, and to most people, it would probably be considered a waste since I use almost none of it in my daily work (programming). However, the value for me has been to push the limits of my ability to abstract concepts, and see how other similar high level minds perform.
alan_cx 13y ago
Coding / programming is part of computer science. CS includes maths, electronics, micro electronics, logic gates, how hard drives work, and what not. CS is about computing and computers as a whole. So, coding is only a part of it. In fact, I see this title as the wrong way round, it should be: computer science is not coding. Too many people think codes know all about computers. In my experience, they dont. They have a limited skill set. Just like support staff who usually cant really code. Having a CS degree myself, I have always felt at an advantage over people who, for example, only program but know knaff all about hardware, OS's, servers, etc, and support people who only have things like MCSEs, and don't know the low level fundamentals. For me, having a CS degree makes me a jack of all trades, all be it, master of none.
- illicium 13y ago
  At American universities, there is often a different degree for the hardware aspect of computing: Computer Engineering, which deals with digital design and other hardware stuff. Computer Science is generally focused on algorithms and math, but the emphasis on coding varies across universities -- some are way more math heavy, while others have more software project work. A few universities have a separate Software Engineering degree, like Cal Poly SLO. The emphasis is on the process of software development and applying computer science fundamentals to a product. This is the job of gathering requirements, designing a piece of software, and, often, actually implementing it. SEs have to know how to structure software and put together data structures and algorithms, integrating knowledge of the hardware (and underlying layers, like the OS) that the software is running on. Computer engineers and electrical engineers make the hardware and everything lower than the OS. Computer scientists have to know how to develop new data structures and algorithms. Making software requires the work of all three professions. I think there's a huge difference between "learning to code" and "learning to become a software engineer," or "learning to become a computer scientist." One can learn to code without a breadth of domain-specific knowledge, which obtaining a degree may give you.
j2kun 13y ago
People who claim they'll never use computer science in their job as a programmer remind me of the people who say they'll never need math after school. It reminds me of the old xkcd: you can get by without it, but the fun things in life are always optional.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  Yeah, but most dev work isn't very interesting.
- randomdata 13y ago
  From my observations, many seem to dismiss anything related to computer science that is not cutting edge research. For instance, I once recall reading a comment downplaying the Linux kernel because it only used simple algorithms that any first year CS student would learn. And that may be the case, but that attitude places CS on a pedestal that most people feel is out of their reach. As such, when they use CS fundamentals in their day-to-day programming job, they don't really feel like they are using CS. They're just coding. Similarly, I think people hold similar attitudes about math. Arithmetic isn't math. It is what elementary school students learn. Only mathematicians with chalkboards full of unintelligible symbols dreaming up formulas that the world has never seen before use math in their job.
notastartup 13y ago
I think Dr. Nassim Taleb, author of Fooled By Randomness put it the best. Real knowledge is gained from tinkering, trial and error. A degree from a recognized academic institution is largely a social credit that is earned through memorization and the ability to recall and recite those references. I studied Economics, so I had to figure out how to code (still at it) by relying on the internet and experimenting. Doing things that seemed interesting. I didn't study CS because at the time it seemed impossibly hard, so instead I focused on learning by reading books, experimenting. I have friends with computing science degree yet they cannot code or have shipped software. Ironic that they cannot work as a software developer but it's the same reason I feel about my Economics degree (not working as an investment banker as I'd dreamed but thank god). Rather their theoretical knowledge in computing science degree seemed to limit their true potential to realize coding involves a different part of the brain then the ones used to pass final exams. I often find the computing science questions in job interviews puzzling. How does the ability to recite an algorithm from the textbook translate into being able to ship code? How does one learn how to play a concerto by simply reading a book listing instructions and being asked to recite specific pages? It's my belief that coding (in terms of shipping software) is a highly organized and rational form of art. You are writing words but it's strictly limited to what the creators of the programming language have selected. How you form the sentences that the computer can understand really comes from trial and error until you've become familiar with it.
- finnw 13y ago
  > I have friends with computing science degree yet they cannot code or have shipped software. So do I, but CS degrees are not about memorization. At least not in North America or Europe. For my CS degree, I had to follow the math and deliver code. Toy code of course, but its a long way from "recalling and reciting references." If it had been about memorization I would probably have failed. I also know people who say they got CS degrees through memorization and the ability to recall and recite references. They are Indian and Chinese. And they can code (even if they believe their degrees do not help.)
  - notastartup 13y ago
    How the hell does this lead to stereotyping an entire race? Just so you know India and China have produced a large bulk of academics in computing science, across various educational institutions in North America and Europe. So I find your statement very arrogant and condescending. Of course you can't memorize your way through a CS course requiring you to write code, but my point is exactly that, school doesn't teach you to actually be able to ship code or write something. It's something one must discover on own terms.
mathattack 13y ago
My 2 cents on the computer science degree versus coding... (Full disclosure - I have a CS degree from a large public school) 1) Many of the top coders, programmers and data scientists that I know don't have CS degrees. (The top coder I know never finished school. He could move from Assembler to C to Objective C effortlessly, and could do everything from games to operating systems. He wasn't lacking for theory or versatility) 2) Despite this, a Computer Science is more difficult rigorous than most non-engineering degrees. Even at open admissions schools, getting a CS degree means being forced to solve difficult problems. 3) Because of #2, a higher % of CS majors make good programmers than most any other major. (I've seen English majors make good programmers, but at a much lower %) 4) Despite #2 and #3, there are still many unqualified CS majors. 5) There is no typical CS programs. Some are very flexible, some very structured. Some have an engineering focus, some are part of liberal arts schools. Some are too narrow, some are not specialized enough. 6) A few years after college, your grades don't matter. A few years after that, the school doesn't matter. A few more years and your major doesn't really matter. At that point, it's all what you've done with your time. (Though it can help to say, "I have a CS degree. I used to be technical.")
wvenable 13y ago
The first thing anyone in this discussion has to realize is that different schools can have vastly different computing science programs. While there is conceptual similarities between most computing science programs, they can vary drastically in breadth and depth. And what one gets out of a program can also depend on the path the individual student takes. If you feel you got nothing out of your education or that your education was mostly worthwhile, that may not reflect on computing science in general but just of one particular implementation of it.
drakaal 13y ago
This is like saying speaking fluent English doesn't make you a genius, and being a Genius doesn't mean you will speak fluent English. Having a CS degree won't make you a genius, or guarantee you write beautiful code. There are 3 factors at play. Brains, Fluency, and Theory. If you have good theory you won't spend 100 years trying to figure out things people already have figured out. If you have good Fluency you will write like people in that language write. "Your code is very Pythonic". If you have brains you may solve a problem no one thought was possible. I don't have a CS degree, but I'm a "grey beard" as a result I have good theory. I don't speak Python as a first language, or the language I think in, so I don't have good fluency. As a certified Genius I have a big brain and often solve things people didn't think were solvable. So I make up for a lack of fluency.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  Where does one apply for their genius certification? Perhaps I can slap that on my resume. Seriously though, I like the assessment. I've worked with people from all three camps. Everyone has their pros and cons. I work in the medical space and end up spending a lot of time with more academic types. In my experience they haven't been the best "architects", but they have been great at solving tough problems and writing code that does what it is supposed to do. I work with them to develop it, and then I take our code and integrate it in a way that allows us to maintain it more easily over the years.
  - drakaal 13y ago
    Mensa is one place. But there are others. Cerebrals Society, Intertel, Prometheus Society, The Triple Nines. My role at Microsoft was as Subject Matter Expert. SME's don't write "much code" but we tend to prove problems are addressable in code and build proof of concept code. My current role as CTO I work in python which is not a language I have been doing for very long. I struggle with Lambda's and List Comprehension, often opting to use slower constructs that a less experienced developer would use. But the logic is solid. I also often am completely with out error handling, and just say. "Well duh, if you try and stuff HTML in my text field it breaks." or "Why did you use curly quotes I'm not handling your Unicode". Part of that is "not knowing" because I don't do it 40 hours a week, and part of it is that it is cheaper to have other fix my code than it is to tie me up adding all the error handling and input validation.
was_hellbanned 13y ago
I have a CS degree from a minor state school. It was okay, not as rigorous as the programs of a few friends who went to much more respected schools, but not bad either. I happened to have an excellent CS teacher in high school. Honestly, almost all of the CS I've employed in 15+ years as a professional programmer, I actually learned in high school. Personally, I would advise young folks who are already passionate about programming and technology to either go all-out in a true engineering field or pursue something that will equip them with a very different skillset. For example, if you have programming skills but get a degree in business and focus on accounting, you could easily be the most productive member of your department. Meanwhile, you'd have the savvy and knowledge to spin up your own side business doing software consulting or, say, mobile apps. I would go so far as to say that, assuming you are motivated and already coding and have a decent math background, a CS program isn't worth it unless it's from a really, really good school.
priya_sri 13y ago
I had penned my views on this (very similar!) here a while ago : Code - It's not just it ! http://priyankasriraghavan.blogspot.in/2013/07/programming-musings-code-its-not-just-it.html http://priyankasriraghavan.blogspot.in/2013/07/programming-m...
NAFV_P 13y ago
My father sent me a link to lifehacker, and was surprised to find I really enjoyed it. I thought it was humourous yet well designed and it explained loops well. The example I tried involved moving angry birds and zombies around on the screen, and it required a bit of thought. It wasn't rocket science, but it wasn't a walk in the park either. This movement will be successful as long as the right resources are available.
minutetominute 13y ago
"So, please, go do that hour of code if you haven’t already. Who knows? Maybe you’ll want to become a software developer, but even if you don’t, it’s worth the effort, and might even be fun!" I need someone to please explain this last bit to me. He seems to suggest that it's pretty easy to become a software developer. This idea seems to be pretty common across hacker news. That all it takes is a little bit of research, and anyone can get a job as a software developer. Is this true? I've been trying to change my current career path from engineering to software development, and I cannot seem to get any conversations started. Does anyone have experience changing their early career paths and how they went about implementing the necessary steps?
- sarahallen 13y ago
  I've spent some time teaching people web development (Ruby, Rails, Javascript) both as a professional trainer and as a volunteer through RailsBridge. I've seen a few motivated individuals go from non-coder to software developer in less than 1 year. Certainly you can get paid jobs writing code sooner, but these folks were doing real development in 6-9 months. With an engineering background you already have a good foundation in problem-solving. I would recommend learning one language really well first. I like Ruby or Python for beginners. Javascript is very practical, but I agree with the other folks in this thread who compared it to C. It's lack of structure make it a hard first language. Then find a small open source project to get involved with. A lot of open source coders will happily mentor you if you put in the effort to contribute -- you can start by contributing docs and good bug reports. Get started, see if you like it. It's not easy, but it can be done. For me, it has always been fun. By the way, I'm a she :)
  - minutetominute 13y ago
    I apologize. I tend to automatically assume most writers are male. It's a terrible default state. Anyways, I'm already pretty well versed on that basics of programming. I think the key, as you pointed out, is to get involved in an open source project to build up my portfolio. Python is the language I prefer, but I use vb.net to build the tools I use at work since the .net framework provides a great interface with the microsoft products corporate office workers are slaves to. I'll start searching for local open-source contributors.
pyrrhotech 13y ago
The truth is that the world needs a lot more software engineers than computer scientists. Yes, there are a lot of hard problems that are best solved by government or academic research, but there is a lot more software eating the world. And to develop the vast majority of that software, you don't need much academic CS knowledge. I know, because I have a mastered in CS and considered getting my Phd. I decided to join industry instead, because I wanted more money. I hardly use any of my CS knowledge on a day to day basis working as a web developer. Yet I make $160k in my mid 20s while my 60 year old professor has never cracked 6 digits... It's sad in a way, but to each his own I guess.
- kazagistar 13y ago
  I would far prefer to earn half as much if it meant working only on problems I find interesting and spending my time teaching others, instead of churning out websites. To each their own, but your pity for your proffesor is likely misplaced.
tomphoolery 13y ago
Like many things in programming, it all boils down to the samn damn arguments that musicians have. Sure, you don't need a music degree to be a musician. But I'm damned proud that I have one, because it's helped me advance the one thing in life that I love doing more than anything else further past most people my age. I have a B.M. in Jazz Studies with a concentration in Vocal Performance. The only way you can reasonably believe that college was "a rip off" is if you didn't have ANY fun that whole time. If you can honestly say that, then I am sorry. You allowed a part of your adolescence become robbed by people who told you what to do. But if you had even an ounce of enjoyment throughout college, if the idea of learning computer science made you smile even one bit, then it was absolutely not a rip-off or a waste of time. "Your time was not wasted if you were happy" - John Lennon
MojoJolo 13y ago
This. If you're judging Computer Science by coding, you are making a huge mistake. Computer Science does not teach you how to code. I remember the only time my university teach me how to code is during our introductory course. Computer Programming 1. And that's it. You're on your own in your coding. Computer Science is more than just coding. It involves graphs, complexity, math, theories, and much more. Which is a lot. And is hard. Like math, anyone can do math. But not anyone can be a mathematician. Anyone can code, but not anyone can be a computer scientist.
- randomsearch 13y ago
  If you do a CS degree that does not involve being taught to code, and code well, then I would ask for your money back.
robomartin 13y ago
Well, it's true. Code is not computer science any more than paint and brushes are artistic paintings or nuts and bolts mechanical engineering. People learn what they learn, formally or informally, and then they either develop a passion for what they learned, or not. Not everyone who studies art can produce artwork most would enjoy, much less a masterpiece. And, in this regard, having encyclopedic knowledge in the field isn't a solution. What I am saying is that it is about the person, not the encyclopedia. Developing artistry requires knowledge, passion and dedication. Knowledge alone isn't the entire equation. Knowledge without passion and dedication is useless, no matter where it comes from. And this might very well be the reason a lot of CS grads falter.
yason 13y ago
If you code and develop in it, you're bound to hit computer science whether officially or informally. Because if you don't, you aren't really coding: you're just staying at your comfort zone and that's no more coding than learning to play a dozen songs with piano and just playing those over and over is not really playing piano. On the other hand, if your background is top-notch computer science you just may suck at coding ― which would be just ok except that I suggest that not many advances in computer science happen unless the dilemmas at hand stem from practical programming problems, after which they can be explained and modelled theoretically and theoretical solutions be devised.
daemonk 13y ago
A 4 year degree is only valuable if you actually had the mental maturity to take advantage of it at the time (I didn't). Unfortunately, that doesn't seem true with the majority of the kids graduating from high school. They see it as just another hoop to jump through. If someone told me now that I can spend 4 years just learning things, have access to intelligent people, and great resources/facilities without worrying about a gap in my cv, I would jump at that chance. I am going to hacker school in Feb, so hopefully it will be kind of like that. Albeit for a much shorter amount of time (3 months).
protez 13y ago
Computer science == models of computing. One of those models is language. We can run machines without codes, but with feelings and images. We, human beings, are just complex finite automata with very complex states and meta-states.
TazeTSchnitzel 13y ago
Code ≠ Computer Science, surely? ;)
hetman 13y ago
The difference between software development and computer science is the difference between being able to assemble a car from spare parts, and being able to design the pieces like a new engine or gear box. The two skill sets don't overlap entirely. However having the latter generally makes mastering the former somewhat easier.
- walid 13y ago
  The best analogy I've read in this thread so far.
antirez 13y ago
True but: Code people, should be open to learn theory when needed. CS people, should be open to understand that writing code is not marginal and takes a lot of time to master. Probably more cooperation would be needed.
- randomsearch 13y ago
  Programming is a crucial part of CS. There is no separation of the two Programmers who don't know CS are programmers who are less educated in the theory of their practice.
- walid 13y ago
  I think the distinction is more like medical researchers and practitioners. CS is more like the research aspect of the craft but once it's done it has to be applied in practice. Sometimes you don't need to be a doctor when feel you have a cold and just take a day off and stay in bed, but a nurse can't help you with cancer. Most people get the common flu and for them you don't have to see a doctor, but what happens in our profession is that some people think that all problems are equivalent to the flu.
waylandsmithers 13y ago
| Also most software has advanced features that require you to do things that use coding skills — setting up mail filters, creating spreadsheet formulas, even styles in Microsoft Word. I've worked with many people who, while presumably listing Microsoft Office skills on their resume, spend time with repetitive tasks in Excel that could be done in minutes or seconds with a formula and a click-and-drag. I've found that the hardest part is finding the best way to tell them that there is an easier way without being condescending or making them feel foolish. I usually go with "Hey, um, can I show you something?" But ideally this opens the window to realizing that you can make Excel (and computers in general) do stuff for you.
bakhy 13y ago
I agree that the distinction needs to be made, although the exact difference between the two, as many of the comments have already stated well, is hard to define. A good post. Nowadays academia is under ever increasing pressure to produce fit-for-work experts, and seen from such a perspective it really can look pointless. I personally strongly disagree with such a view. IMO, it should appear to be pointless! It should broaden your thinking and introduce you to the cutting edge of the field, not just specialize you for a certain line of work. There should be programs which will do only such a specialization, but a full-on CS course is supposed to be more. In the end, how well you will work will depend on a lot more than just the school, but a good school will help. The Law of Leaky Abstractions is, perhaps, a good argument for why it is useful to learn all that theory even though in practice it is rarely needed. Sometimes, you just need to know what is going on behind the scenes. P.S. I always have the feeling that the Dunning-Kruger effect is strongly present in these discussions. The first programmer that I heard claiming that a degree is useless is also the guy who didn't know what a DB transaction is for and when he should use it. It's not a huge deal, we fixed the bug, taught him, and then he knew. But - not knowing such basics, how could he possibly know what else he is also oblivious about? We need good schools to teach us that we don't know shit.
rbanffy 13y ago
"[Computer science] is not really about computers -- and it's not about computers in the same sense that physics is not really about particle accelerators, and biology is not about microscopes and Petri dishes...and geometry isn't really about using surveying instruments. Now the reason that we think computer science is about computers is pretty much the same reason that the Egyptians thought geometry was about surveying instruments: when some field is just getting started and you don't really understand it very well, it's very easy to confuse the essence of what you're doing with the tools that you use." -- Hal Abelson
stmartin 13y ago
perhaps, but computer science -> code.
ra3 13y ago
Ryan Carson is the next Steve Jobs
Codhisattva 13y ago
What I learned while getting my CS degree: The physics of microelectronic devices Machine language C Data structures Sociology Psychology Anthropology Literature Politics and Activism College is an opportunity to learn. Whether you seize it or waste it is up to you. [edit: just want to add that the OP makes a great point]
bnolsen 13y ago
engineering or applied physics are the correct degrees. i've never been impressed with CS guys. In my time they were washouts from the better degrees.
atmosx 13y ago
Do you need a CS degree to become a programmer? Of course not, I don't have one but I can program. Does a CS degree make you a better programmer? Most certainly it will! It will give you an optimal background on which you can build solid knowledge. But you can't be 100% sure about that either. Can you learn everything and more than a CS laureate by yourself? Of course you can, especially today that information (mostly about technology) flows free online. You can order books from amazon (Knuth anyone?), etc. As my genius Math professor once said: "When you come to the oral exam session, I will ask you a question. In 99% of cases, the answer is: it depends..."

198 points by sarahallen 13y ago

Yeah, a CS degree isn't suuuper-helpful for organizing a coherent program around a snazzy framework for the latest web technologies. It's for when you need to do something like, oh, "figure out how to upgrade the work-management system so you can move from coarse-grained lock system to a finer-grained lock system with zero downtime." Then you think back to your old courses covering Parallelism and the like, and plan it out.

j45 13y ago

Customers rarely care what we code or computer science in

jrarredondo 13y ago
Customers of any product rarely care what the people involved with the arts and sciences behind those product's creations do. That observation is not restricted to coding or comp sci.
- j45 13y ago
  Yup, they just want to receive value (saving or making money/time) for using the product.
PeterWhittaker 13y ago
I don't know that I've ever been more torn about a comment than this one. I worked in both "core dev" and professional services development, and have seen what comes from well-architected software design, the sort of architecture that only experienced top-line CS graduates (or several-decades-worth-of-experience autodidacts or engineers) seem capable of producing (IMHO, YMWV)... ...and have seen many, many 1.0's, shelfware, etc. A CS grad from a top-flight school with excellent experience is worth their weight in gold, at least on teams of multiple people developing big systems - you want at least one, they will take care of data design, software architecture, etc., and likely cause your code to be more robust, more maintainable, etc. But motivated college grads (I'm Canadian, not sure what the US term would be), talented engineers, and autodidacts can crank out code like nobody's business. I don't know that I'd want to built a multi-year "core services" library out of it, but PoCs, MVPs, 1.0's, and demoware? Why not? And the top-flight CS grad might be wasted there. I'm torn because I care about quality, but really high quality only matters for the really long-lived system, the health-and-safety-critical system, and the system that must survive on its own with minimal human intervention and maintenance. Were I building a radiation control for healthcare, I would want electrical engineers and CS grads from top-flight systems. Ditto military avionics. If I was building apps, apps, apps, servers built atop well-architected OSS libraries, etc., I'd want code, fast, and I'd balance quality Vs lifetime to maximize profit, and probably hire less experienced, less well trained devs who "give good face", understand requirements, and code fast. The libraries themselves? Good question.... I don't have a conclusion. But j45 is right, customers don't care so much - but they don't want 3AM bugs, either. It's a trade-off.
- j45 13y ago
  A few observations: - Being reasonably kind to your future self without over engineering or over architecting is the real skill of a talented developer/engineer in my eyes. - All software is like hardware, no matter how it's built, it has it's limits that will likely have to be revisited. - Customers not caring about which language/framework something is made in doesn't mean the code is automatically unkept or made carelessly. - Most languages and frameworks are pretty capable. All have their tradeoffs of what they uniquely provide vs give away. Very few projects will critically fail or succeed solely from the selection of a particular framework or language. - I'm not sure if you're connecting customers who don't care what language their system is built in, causing 3 AM bugs. If so: a) 3 AM bugs are not a cause of any particular language of framework or language, or the customer not caring about which one, but rather, the developer. b) Bugs are a reality on all platforms, and are best insulated against by a combination of process, policy and strategy that can be reasonably implemented in any stack. Ultimately, it's about how the user feels and the value that provided to them in solving a pain. Customer value is NOT the same value the developer provides themselves to make the developer's own life easier and somehow believing that all the build tools in the world will solve the customer's problem any better, or make a difference for the end user. It's not as often as it seems. Most languages and frameworks are capable of delivering delight if the developer spends time focussing on the user's pain and not just their own pains in their stack. Looking at how much value HN provides, it's not a function of it's language, framework, or coding. Maybe like inter-faith, i'm an inter-platform kind of guy as a polyglot and see the good everyone can be doing instead of dividing among syntactical philosophy that is indistinguishable to the users in the end.

sheetjs 13y ago

> Treehouse CEO Ryan Carson declares “A computer science degree is a rip off…I know because I have one.” Perhaps his CS degree was from a college which didn’t have a very good program or maybe his focus has been web development where you rarely need computer science. According to wikipedia: > In 2000, he graduated from Colorado State University with a Computer Science degree I suspect, like with most fields, that the school definitely matters (and that he may not have arrived at the same conclusion had he attended a school with a better CS program)

analog31 13y ago
I've noticed that the "degree is a rip off" comment crops up among graduates of practically every field from every school, equally from successful people and failures. So I'm not sure that I'd read much into it.
rayiner 13y ago
Colorado State is a major research university and has a pretty good CS program. I certainly wouldn't chalk his opinion up to a CS program that wasn't strong enough. I'd attribute it to the nature of web development versus more theoretically intensive problems.
alayne 13y ago
Well, for starters, he is a CEO not a CTO.
cjf4 13y ago
The key piece of context about this quote is that Ryan Carson has a vested interest in people deciding they do not need a computer science degree to code.
walid 13y ago
Well if you think of it, a CEO like Steve Jobs will call the PC a truck... to sell the iPad. • Computer Science = Truck • Treehouse = iPad But how do you make iPad dev tools?
- 13y ago

jd007 13y ago

I've always thought of computer science as a branch of mathematics. To me coding or programming is applied (or engineering) computer science, it's an engineering field (hence the term software engineer). Just like there is theoretical physics (a basic science), and also applied/engineering physics (e.g. mechanical engineering). They are related fields, but specializing in one does not mean you will be good at the other (it certainly helps). The terms coding and computer science do get used interchangeably by a lot of people though, since most may not understand the difference. I've learned to live with it (occasionally I point out the difference, if I think the person misusing the terms actually cared to know).

randomsearch 13y ago
I would say some of Computer Science is mathematics. Mathematics is the foundation of Computer Science, but CS is not a branch of mathematics, although the origins of the field are found there. It is an important, core, part of the subject, but it does not entirely encompass it. For example, CS also includes Psychology, Graphic Design, social science, art, etc. Also, CS involves the teaching of programming, which is a craft (ignoring edge cases) - crafts cannot be taught through maths alone.
- a_olt 13y ago
  Absolutely, CS is an inter-disciplinary subject.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

andrewfong 13y ago

Speaking from experience, this is true. You also don't really know when true CS is useful until you run into it. I graduated with the equivalent of a minor in CS. When I started coding for an web-based gaming start-up in 2007, it was mostly irrelevant. You don't need a CS degree to learn Ruby on Rails, nor is it necessarily useful (beyond your basic intro courses) to have taken CS courses. Flash-forward a year, after we raised our seed round. Our online game had grown in complexity quite a bit, and we found ourselves having to deal with things like complex image rendering, AI, and pathfinding. While it's possible to get a decent grasp of these topics through Google and O'Reilly books, it's definitely an order of magnitude more difficult than figuring out a new web framework. As mentioned before, I only have a minor in CS so my exposure to these topics was minimal, and there were definitely nights where I found myself wishing I had taken another AI or advanced algorithms course.

eru 13y ago
My difficulties were the other way round: knowing all the theory doesn't actually make you a better (or even a good) coder. Only when you run into the problems you mentioned, does academics help at all.
jonny_eh 13y ago
These "hardcore" problems like AI and pathfinding are definitely tough problems. The issue is that there's an infinite supply of such problems and there's no way a 4 year degree can cover them all. In fact, even if they did, most lessons would be forgotten before they could be proven useful in the real world. Why not just learn these areas when needed? Taking an Advanced AI course in just a 2-3 month semester is how many hours? Just spend a week or two hitting the books and you'll be good to go, and you're knowledge will be bleeding edge and up to date. Plus, you'll have been paid to learn it!
- bello 13y ago
  While it's true that there is an "infinite supply of these problems", a good CS program it's supposed to teach you how to think, hence teaching you how to learn. If you have a very solid understanding of the fundamentals, you should be able to go and solve problems you've never seen before. If you don't, you could be stuck using other people's solutions to your problems, hence not being able to solve new ones that you might encounter.

tslathrow 13y ago

I did an undergrad in CS (Columbia) - in retrospect I should only have minored in CS. I'm not sure it's worth the workload! You will have _no_ free time and get reamed in GPA Very math-heavy and the project based classes were brutal.

zhemao 13y ago
I'm sure this depends a lot on what your preferences are. I just finished my undergrad in computer engineering at Columbia. I thought the project-based classes (and the vast amounts of work they entailed) were the most valuable parts of the program. Sure, you'd probably get higher grades if you just minored, but when it comes to hiring for software engineering jobs, companies tend to care more about what you know and what you've done than what your grades are. And you're more likely to know more about CS and have done more interesting projects if you have taken difficult project-based classes like operating systems, embedded systems, and programming languages and translators.
- tslathrow 13y ago
  I will never forget OS 1... I still have nightmares
woah 13y ago
I would hope you enjoyed computer science! Learn up on the arts, politics, etc in your spare time. These are the fun subjects.
dylandrop 13y ago
I did undergrad CS @ Columbia as well. Of course you're not going to skate by as you would in insert-non-offensive-easy-major-name-here, but you learn a hell of a lot more. It's my personal belief that (especially in technical fields) you can't learn without putting a lot of hard work into something. But in doing so, you'll also keep yourself a step ahead of the curve in the job market. As per the article, plenty of people know how to code, not quite as many know CS. Also personally I felt like this is an exceptionally competitive major (as are sciences in general) but I'm sure that's true for other schools as well. It's okay to get a B -- you're being compared against other brilliant people and plenty of people would be lucky to hire you. This is probably the one piece of knowledge I would have told myself 3 years ago when I started it.

joelgrus 13y ago

computer science != a CS degree

walid 13y ago
hahaha that is a whole new can of worms... In my experience, mentors matter more than the course title. I've had the privilege of being taught by some of the best teachers and witnessed some of the worst. When your instructor deals with the course material as the sole purpose of a student being in class then the important lessons of computer science become nothing more than an exercise in regurgitation. However I've had my eyes opened by certain individuals who showed me what mathematics means in real life, how algorithms fail, why project management is important and how it's done and even how all coding has a mathematical basis (like SQL and compiler decisions). Personally my CS appreciation was a byproduct of being in the presence of these mentors rather than reading a book. They showed me the essence of the science. Mind you I love the books and still read my university books sometimes for fun, sometimes to brush up on the science after getting rusty.

catilac 13y ago

I think this distinction is incredibly crucial. There has been so much talk about how a CS degree is useless (and I for a moment bought that garbage as a holder of a CS degree), but it is completely untrue. As you work with more and more people in this industry, you frequently run into people without a degree, or, more importantly, no true know how, as I do stand by the fact that it's not required to have a degree to learn this stuff, who behave as if they are experts regardless of their poor mental model of how computers work. It's important for these people to know what they don't know. Reminding people that Code is not CS is a good way to make that happen.

FrankenPC 13y ago

When I was 16, I was obsessed with 3D graphics (hilariously primitive back 30 years ago). I learned programming to create , rotate, translate, and shade objects in 3D space. I learned computer science to understand how you manage vector lists, matrix math, and strange recursion algorithms. I learned that programming is computer science applied. Sort of like how math is a tool to apply calculus to real work problems. One won't work without the other. Saying "code != computer science" is a misrepresentation of the symbiotic process that's going on in the human mind. I think a fair statement is: programming(code) is the first level of computer science knowledge.

zhemao 13y ago
Isn't that exactly what the author is saying, though? He's saying that programming is part of computer science, but knowing how to code doesn't mean you know computer science.
- FrankenPC 13y ago
  That's not what I'm saying. Saying "code" and "computer science" are two different things is a bit ridiculous.

mhogomchungu 13y ago

Fundamentally,computer science = data structures + algorithms. in a data structure class,you learn the basic structures like PODs,structs,vectors and linked lists. in algorithm class,you learn various basic sorting algorithms plus the big O notation and thats pretty much it. Then you will take a few physics classes,then chemistry classes,then maybe calculus one and two,then probably discrete mathematics class,one or two writing class,if you a lucky,maybe a single semester of operating system class. you may learn the basics on haskell in one class,the basic of java in another,maybe assembly in another class and you get your degree.Basically,you will leave school knowing only the basics of a bunch of things but not enough of anything. The above it how it felt to me as a CS major.

kaplejon 13y ago
My experience was similar to yours, though even more basic. I went for a 2-year degree at a community college, and it felt as though every course was a refresher in "This is a variable, and what a variable does. This is syntax, and syntax means…" Etc… It wasn't until getting into the "real world" that I realized the full value of my data structure courses. Those were the ones I kept returning to when trying to learn and understand new skills on the job. (Sadly, my 2-year degree didn't cover any algorithm learning.) So, now I have the advantage of a few years of "real world" experience to try and plot a course for how to get formal education on the remaining pieces that seem to actually have direct correlation to a career in computer programming. Not sure if it's a blessing or a curse for me, but I just have to keep moving forward.
aleph_naught 13y ago
People are incredulous when I tell them I use 90% of the stuff learned while getting my CS degree. Stuff I've done in the real world: AI: I've lost count of the number of times I've had to implement A* Graphics: wrote a ray tracer; matrix transformations Data structures and algorithms: wrote an approximation algorithm for the travelling salesman problem (christofides); fancier data structures like bloom-filters, lru caches; and just every day coding Databases: query optimization OS: Made me aware of systems (context switching, caching performance,...). Scheduling algorithms and how they affect the embedded software I write. Concurrent programming. Networking: Super helpful for everyday stuff when you understand the underlying principles. I've had to implement an RFC from scratch (DNS). Linear algebra: Used extensively in a path planner I wrote---with it I was able to reduce the state space by orders of magnitude compared to the standard grid approach. Statistics: wrote an online algorithm for adaptive windowed linear regression Even computability theory has been helpful, as it has strengthened my proving and reasoning skills---helping me find holes in requirements, or proving algorithms/invariants. Same with all the theoretical math courses I took (Analysis, Set Theory, First Order Logic ...) The list goes on... Above all, my CS degree taught me how to learn CS and beyond. Sometimes I worry about the potential solutions I am overlooking, because I never fully branched into the continuous domain (control theory, etc).

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

woah 13y ago

I look at this from the other side as well. I've worked with brilliant people with ivy league CS degrees who wrote much messier and less maintainable code than me, an autodidact designer/js dev with 1.5 years of experience. Maybe I'm wrong, and there was something in their code that I wasn't seeing, but I don't think so. There can also be a bit of an attitude, like the person is thinking "of course this is good, I went to Stanford". But maybe that's my imagination. Another explanation is that these people are just so good that they are able to read messy and convoluted code no problem, and us mortals need to step up our game. On the other hand, these people would easily be able to reason about complex performance and security issues beyond me. I think that the hardcore CS issues are a science, while writing clean code in a web framework, browser, and API design is more of a craft. If you hire too many computer scientists, your code base could be full of fascinating technical tricks, but creaky and hard to work with. Too many craftsmen, and you'll get stuck on simple problems. It's a balance. EDIT: Downvotes? Please explain. Perhaps I am not able to fully comprehend the issues at hand.

osdiab 13y ago
I think people are falsely equating computer science with software engineering. You can get a very strong theoretical basis for programming at a place like Stanford, and the work you can do may have nothing to do with best practices but rather a lot to do with more abstract concepts like algorithmic efficiency or graph analysis or what not. As a Stanford student personally Ive learned a lot more about best practices in software systems outside of the university; in fact you get very little of that from classes. What you do get is in depth coverage of topics that most are unlikely to get a formal treatment of on their own, depending on your concentration, whether that means cutting edge operating systems and compilers research, or rigorous discussion of the psychology behind ux design. Hope that clarifies a bit!
- natrius 13y ago
  Plus, there are some things that I don't believe can be taught effectively in college. Stanford told me tests were good, but I didn't really believe it until I had to work on a legacy codebase without tests. Best practices are easier to digest when you've experienced the problem they're meant to solve.

Bahamut 13y ago

The value of a degree is what you make of it. I think the most important aspect of college/grad school/etc. is that you have the opportunity to push the bounds of your mind. I spent 4 years in grad school for math at an excellent program, and to most people, it would probably be considered a waste since I use almost none of it in my daily work (programming). However, the value for me has been to push the limits of my ability to abstract concepts, and see how other similar high level minds perform.

alan_cx 13y ago

Coding / programming is part of computer science. CS includes maths, electronics, micro electronics, logic gates, how hard drives work, and what not. CS is about computing and computers as a whole. So, coding is only a part of it. In fact, I see this title as the wrong way round, it should be: computer science is not coding. Too many people think codes know all about computers. In my experience, they dont. They have a limited skill set. Just like support staff who usually cant really code. Having a CS degree myself, I have always felt at an advantage over people who, for example, only program but know knaff all about hardware, OS's, servers, etc, and support people who only have things like MCSEs, and don't know the low level fundamentals. For me, having a CS degree makes me a jack of all trades, all be it, master of none.

illicium 13y ago
At American universities, there is often a different degree for the hardware aspect of computing: Computer Engineering, which deals with digital design and other hardware stuff. Computer Science is generally focused on algorithms and math, but the emphasis on coding varies across universities -- some are way more math heavy, while others have more software project work. A few universities have a separate Software Engineering degree, like Cal Poly SLO. The emphasis is on the process of software development and applying computer science fundamentals to a product. This is the job of gathering requirements, designing a piece of software, and, often, actually implementing it. SEs have to know how to structure software and put together data structures and algorithms, integrating knowledge of the hardware (and underlying layers, like the OS) that the software is running on. Computer engineers and electrical engineers make the hardware and everything lower than the OS. Computer scientists have to know how to develop new data structures and algorithms. Making software requires the work of all three professions. I think there's a huge difference between "learning to code" and "learning to become a software engineer," or "learning to become a computer scientist." One can learn to code without a breadth of domain-specific knowledge, which obtaining a degree may give you.

j2kun 13y ago

People who claim they'll never use computer science in their job as a programmer remind me of the people who say they'll never need math after school. It reminds me of the old xkcd: you can get by without it, but the fun things in life are always optional.

EpicEng 13y ago
Yeah, but most dev work isn't very interesting.
randomdata 13y ago
From my observations, many seem to dismiss anything related to computer science that is not cutting edge research. For instance, I once recall reading a comment downplaying the Linux kernel because it only used simple algorithms that any first year CS student would learn. And that may be the case, but that attitude places CS on a pedestal that most people feel is out of their reach. As such, when they use CS fundamentals in their day-to-day programming job, they don't really feel like they are using CS. They're just coding. Similarly, I think people hold similar attitudes about math. Arithmetic isn't math. It is what elementary school students learn. Only mathematicians with chalkboards full of unintelligible symbols dreaming up formulas that the world has never seen before use math in their job.

notastartup 13y ago

I think Dr. Nassim Taleb, author of Fooled By Randomness put it the best. Real knowledge is gained from tinkering, trial and error. A degree from a recognized academic institution is largely a social credit that is earned through memorization and the ability to recall and recite those references. I studied Economics, so I had to figure out how to code (still at it) by relying on the internet and experimenting. Doing things that seemed interesting. I didn't study CS because at the time it seemed impossibly hard, so instead I focused on learning by reading books, experimenting. I have friends with computing science degree yet they cannot code or have shipped software. Ironic that they cannot work as a software developer but it's the same reason I feel about my Economics degree (not working as an investment banker as I'd dreamed but thank god). Rather their theoretical knowledge in computing science degree seemed to limit their true potential to realize coding involves a different part of the brain then the ones used to pass final exams. I often find the computing science questions in job interviews puzzling. How does the ability to recite an algorithm from the textbook translate into being able to ship code? How does one learn how to play a concerto by simply reading a book listing instructions and being asked to recite specific pages? It's my belief that coding (in terms of shipping software) is a highly organized and rational form of art. You are writing words but it's strictly limited to what the creators of the programming language have selected. How you form the sentences that the computer can understand really comes from trial and error until you've become familiar with it.

finnw 13y ago
> I have friends with computing science degree yet they cannot code or have shipped software. So do I, but CS degrees are not about memorization. At least not in North America or Europe. For my CS degree, I had to follow the math and deliver code. Toy code of course, but its a long way from "recalling and reciting references." If it had been about memorization I would probably have failed. I also know people who say they got CS degrees through memorization and the ability to recall and recite references. They are Indian and Chinese. And they can code (even if they believe their degrees do not help.)
- notastartup 13y ago
  How the hell does this lead to stereotyping an entire race? Just so you know India and China have produced a large bulk of academics in computing science, across various educational institutions in North America and Europe. So I find your statement very arrogant and condescending. Of course you can't memorize your way through a CS course requiring you to write code, but my point is exactly that, school doesn't teach you to actually be able to ship code or write something. It's something one must discover on own terms.

mathattack 13y ago

My 2 cents on the computer science degree versus coding... (Full disclosure - I have a CS degree from a large public school) 1) Many of the top coders, programmers and data scientists that I know don't have CS degrees. (The top coder I know never finished school. He could move from Assembler to C to Objective C effortlessly, and could do everything from games to operating systems. He wasn't lacking for theory or versatility) 2) Despite this, a Computer Science is more difficult rigorous than most non-engineering degrees. Even at open admissions schools, getting a CS degree means being forced to solve difficult problems. 3) Because of #2, a higher % of CS majors make good programmers than most any other major. (I've seen English majors make good programmers, but at a much lower %) 4) Despite #2 and #3, there are still many unqualified CS majors. 5) There is no typical CS programs. Some are very flexible, some very structured. Some have an engineering focus, some are part of liberal arts schools. Some are too narrow, some are not specialized enough. 6) A few years after college, your grades don't matter. A few years after that, the school doesn't matter. A few more years and your major doesn't really matter. At that point, it's all what you've done with your time. (Though it can help to say, "I have a CS degree. I used to be technical.")

wvenable 13y ago

The first thing anyone in this discussion has to realize is that different schools can have vastly different computing science programs. While there is conceptual similarities between most computing science programs, they can vary drastically in breadth and depth. And what one gets out of a program can also depend on the path the individual student takes. If you feel you got nothing out of your education or that your education was mostly worthwhile, that may not reflect on computing science in general but just of one particular implementation of it.

drakaal 13y ago

This is like saying speaking fluent English doesn't make you a genius, and being a Genius doesn't mean you will speak fluent English. Having a CS degree won't make you a genius, or guarantee you write beautiful code. There are 3 factors at play. Brains, Fluency, and Theory. If you have good theory you won't spend 100 years trying to figure out things people already have figured out. If you have good Fluency you will write like people in that language write. "Your code is very Pythonic". If you have brains you may solve a problem no one thought was possible. I don't have a CS degree, but I'm a "grey beard" as a result I have good theory. I don't speak Python as a first language, or the language I think in, so I don't have good fluency. As a certified Genius I have a big brain and often solve things people didn't think were solvable. So I make up for a lack of fluency.

EpicEng 13y ago
Where does one apply for their genius certification? Perhaps I can slap that on my resume. Seriously though, I like the assessment. I've worked with people from all three camps. Everyone has their pros and cons. I work in the medical space and end up spending a lot of time with more academic types. In my experience they haven't been the best "architects", but they have been great at solving tough problems and writing code that does what it is supposed to do. I work with them to develop it, and then I take our code and integrate it in a way that allows us to maintain it more easily over the years.
- drakaal 13y ago
  Mensa is one place. But there are others. Cerebrals Society, Intertel, Prometheus Society, The Triple Nines. My role at Microsoft was as Subject Matter Expert. SME's don't write "much code" but we tend to prove problems are addressable in code and build proof of concept code. My current role as CTO I work in python which is not a language I have been doing for very long. I struggle with Lambda's and List Comprehension, often opting to use slower constructs that a less experienced developer would use. But the logic is solid. I also often am completely with out error handling, and just say. "Well duh, if you try and stuff HTML in my text field it breaks." or "Why did you use curly quotes I'm not handling your Unicode". Part of that is "not knowing" because I don't do it 40 hours a week, and part of it is that it is cheaper to have other fix my code than it is to tie me up adding all the error handling and input validation.

was_hellbanned 13y ago

I have a CS degree from a minor state school. It was okay, not as rigorous as the programs of a few friends who went to much more respected schools, but not bad either. I happened to have an excellent CS teacher in high school. Honestly, almost all of the CS I've employed in 15+ years as a professional programmer, I actually learned in high school. Personally, I would advise young folks who are already passionate about programming and technology to either go all-out in a true engineering field or pursue something that will equip them with a very different skillset. For example, if you have programming skills but get a degree in business and focus on accounting, you could easily be the most productive member of your department. Meanwhile, you'd have the savvy and knowledge to spin up your own side business doing software consulting or, say, mobile apps. I would go so far as to say that, assuming you are motivated and already coding and have a decent math background, a CS program isn't worth it unless it's from a really, really good school.

priya_sri 13y ago

I had penned my views on this (very similar!) here a while ago : Code - It's not just it ! http://priyankasriraghavan.blogspot.in/2013/07/programming-musings-code-its-not-just-it.html http://priyankasriraghavan.blogspot.in/2013/07/programming-m...

NAFV_P 13y ago

My father sent me a link to lifehacker, and was surprised to find I really enjoyed it. I thought it was humourous yet well designed and it explained loops well. The example I tried involved moving angry birds and zombies around on the screen, and it required a bit of thought. It wasn't rocket science, but it wasn't a walk in the park either. This movement will be successful as long as the right resources are available.

minutetominute 13y ago

"So, please, go do that hour of code if you haven’t already. Who knows? Maybe you’ll want to become a software developer, but even if you don’t, it’s worth the effort, and might even be fun!" I need someone to please explain this last bit to me. He seems to suggest that it's pretty easy to become a software developer. This idea seems to be pretty common across hacker news. That all it takes is a little bit of research, and anyone can get a job as a software developer. Is this true? I've been trying to change my current career path from engineering to software development, and I cannot seem to get any conversations started. Does anyone have experience changing their early career paths and how they went about implementing the necessary steps?

sarahallen 13y ago
I've spent some time teaching people web development (Ruby, Rails, Javascript) both as a professional trainer and as a volunteer through RailsBridge. I've seen a few motivated individuals go from non-coder to software developer in less than 1 year. Certainly you can get paid jobs writing code sooner, but these folks were doing real development in 6-9 months. With an engineering background you already have a good foundation in problem-solving. I would recommend learning one language really well first. I like Ruby or Python for beginners. Javascript is very practical, but I agree with the other folks in this thread who compared it to C. It's lack of structure make it a hard first language. Then find a small open source project to get involved with. A lot of open source coders will happily mentor you if you put in the effort to contribute -- you can start by contributing docs and good bug reports. Get started, see if you like it. It's not easy, but it can be done. For me, it has always been fun. By the way, I'm a she :)
- minutetominute 13y ago
  I apologize. I tend to automatically assume most writers are male. It's a terrible default state. Anyways, I'm already pretty well versed on that basics of programming. I think the key, as you pointed out, is to get involved in an open source project to build up my portfolio. Python is the language I prefer, but I use vb.net to build the tools I use at work since the .net framework provides a great interface with the microsoft products corporate office workers are slaves to. I'll start searching for local open-source contributors.

pyrrhotech 13y ago

The truth is that the world needs a lot more software engineers than computer scientists. Yes, there are a lot of hard problems that are best solved by government or academic research, but there is a lot more software eating the world. And to develop the vast majority of that software, you don't need much academic CS knowledge. I know, because I have a mastered in CS and considered getting my Phd. I decided to join industry instead, because I wanted more money. I hardly use any of my CS knowledge on a day to day basis working as a web developer. Yet I make $160k in my mid 20s while my 60 year old professor has never cracked 6 digits... It's sad in a way, but to each his own I guess.

kazagistar 13y ago
I would far prefer to earn half as much if it meant working only on problems I find interesting and spending my time teaching others, instead of churning out websites. To each their own, but your pity for your proffesor is likely misplaced.

tomphoolery 13y ago

Like many things in programming, it all boils down to the samn damn arguments that musicians have. Sure, you don't need a music degree to be a musician. But I'm damned proud that I have one, because it's helped me advance the one thing in life that I love doing more than anything else further past most people my age. I have a B.M. in Jazz Studies with a concentration in Vocal Performance. The only way you can reasonably believe that college was "a rip off" is if you didn't have ANY fun that whole time. If you can honestly say that, then I am sorry. You allowed a part of your adolescence become robbed by people who told you what to do. But if you had even an ounce of enjoyment throughout college, if the idea of learning computer science made you smile even one bit, then it was absolutely not a rip-off or a waste of time. "Your time was not wasted if you were happy" - John Lennon

MojoJolo 13y ago

This. If you're judging Computer Science by coding, you are making a huge mistake. Computer Science does not teach you how to code. I remember the only time my university teach me how to code is during our introductory course. Computer Programming 1. And that's it. You're on your own in your coding. Computer Science is more than just coding. It involves graphs, complexity, math, theories, and much more. Which is a lot. And is hard. Like math, anyone can do math. But not anyone can be a mathematician. Anyone can code, but not anyone can be a computer scientist.

randomsearch 13y ago
If you do a CS degree that does not involve being taught to code, and code well, then I would ask for your money back.

robomartin 13y ago

Well, it's true. Code is not computer science any more than paint and brushes are artistic paintings or nuts and bolts mechanical engineering. People learn what they learn, formally or informally, and then they either develop a passion for what they learned, or not. Not everyone who studies art can produce artwork most would enjoy, much less a masterpiece. And, in this regard, having encyclopedic knowledge in the field isn't a solution. What I am saying is that it is about the person, not the encyclopedia. Developing artistry requires knowledge, passion and dedication. Knowledge alone isn't the entire equation. Knowledge without passion and dedication is useless, no matter where it comes from. And this might very well be the reason a lot of CS grads falter.

yason 13y ago

If you code and develop in it, you're bound to hit computer science whether officially or informally. Because if you don't, you aren't really coding: you're just staying at your comfort zone and that's no more coding than learning to play a dozen songs with piano and just playing those over and over is not really playing piano. On the other hand, if your background is top-notch computer science you just may suck at coding ― which would be just ok except that I suggest that not many advances in computer science happen unless the dilemmas at hand stem from practical programming problems, after which they can be explained and modelled theoretically and theoretical solutions be devised.

daemonk 13y ago

A 4 year degree is only valuable if you actually had the mental maturity to take advantage of it at the time (I didn't). Unfortunately, that doesn't seem true with the majority of the kids graduating from high school. They see it as just another hoop to jump through. If someone told me now that I can spend 4 years just learning things, have access to intelligent people, and great resources/facilities without worrying about a gap in my cv, I would jump at that chance. I am going to hacker school in Feb, so hopefully it will be kind of like that. Albeit for a much shorter amount of time (3 months).

protez 13y ago

Computer science == models of computing. One of those models is language. We can run machines without codes, but with feelings and images. We, human beings, are just complex finite automata with very complex states and meta-states.

TazeTSchnitzel 13y ago

Code ≠ Computer Science, surely? ;)

hetman 13y ago

The difference between software development and computer science is the difference between being able to assemble a car from spare parts, and being able to design the pieces like a new engine or gear box. The two skill sets don't overlap entirely. However having the latter generally makes mastering the former somewhat easier.

walid 13y ago
The best analogy I've read in this thread so far.

antirez 13y ago

True but: Code people, should be open to learn theory when needed. CS people, should be open to understand that writing code is not marginal and takes a lot of time to master. Probably more cooperation would be needed.

randomsearch 13y ago
Programming is a crucial part of CS. There is no separation of the two Programmers who don't know CS are programmers who are less educated in the theory of their practice.
walid 13y ago
I think the distinction is more like medical researchers and practitioners. CS is more like the research aspect of the craft but once it's done it has to be applied in practice. Sometimes you don't need to be a doctor when feel you have a cold and just take a day off and stay in bed, but a nurse can't help you with cancer. Most people get the common flu and for them you don't have to see a doctor, but what happens in our profession is that some people think that all problems are equivalent to the flu.

waylandsmithers 13y ago

| Also most software has advanced features that require you to do things that use coding skills — setting up mail filters, creating spreadsheet formulas, even styles in Microsoft Word. I've worked with many people who, while presumably listing Microsoft Office skills on their resume, spend time with repetitive tasks in Excel that could be done in minutes or seconds with a formula and a click-and-drag. I've found that the hardest part is finding the best way to tell them that there is an easier way without being condescending or making them feel foolish. I usually go with "Hey, um, can I show you something?" But ideally this opens the window to realizing that you can make Excel (and computers in general) do stuff for you.

bakhy 13y ago

I agree that the distinction needs to be made, although the exact difference between the two, as many of the comments have already stated well, is hard to define. A good post. Nowadays academia is under ever increasing pressure to produce fit-for-work experts, and seen from such a perspective it really can look pointless. I personally strongly disagree with such a view. IMO, it should appear to be pointless! It should broaden your thinking and introduce you to the cutting edge of the field, not just specialize you for a certain line of work. There should be programs which will do only such a specialization, but a full-on CS course is supposed to be more. In the end, how well you will work will depend on a lot more than just the school, but a good school will help. The Law of Leaky Abstractions is, perhaps, a good argument for why it is useful to learn all that theory even though in practice it is rarely needed. Sometimes, you just need to know what is going on behind the scenes. P.S. I always have the feeling that the Dunning-Kruger effect is strongly present in these discussions. The first programmer that I heard claiming that a degree is useless is also the guy who didn't know what a DB transaction is for and when he should use it. It's not a huge deal, we fixed the bug, taught him, and then he knew. But - not knowing such basics, how could he possibly know what else he is also oblivious about? We need good schools to teach us that we don't know shit.

rbanffy 13y ago

"[Computer science] is not really about computers -- and it's not about computers in the same sense that physics is not really about particle accelerators, and biology is not about microscopes and Petri dishes...and geometry isn't really about using surveying instruments. Now the reason that we think computer science is about computers is pretty much the same reason that the Egyptians thought geometry was about surveying instruments: when some field is just getting started and you don't really understand it very well, it's very easy to confuse the essence of what you're doing with the tools that you use." -- Hal Abelson

stmartin 13y ago

perhaps, but computer science -> code.

ra3 13y ago

Ryan Carson is the next Steve Jobs

Codhisattva 13y ago

What I learned while getting my CS degree: The physics of microelectronic devices Machine language C Data structures Sociology Psychology Anthropology Literature Politics and Activism College is an opportunity to learn. Whether you seize it or waste it is up to you. [edit: just want to add that the OP makes a great point]

bnolsen 13y ago

engineering or applied physics are the correct degrees. i've never been impressed with CS guys. In my time they were washouts from the better degrees.

atmosx 13y ago

Do you need a CS degree to become a programmer? Of course not, I don't have one but I can program. Does a CS degree make you a better programmer? Most certainly it will! It will give you an optimal background on which you can build solid knowledge. But you can't be 100% sure about that either. Can you learn everything and more than a CS laureate by yourself? Of course you can, especially today that information (mostly about technology) flows free online. You can order books from amazon (Knuth anyone?), etc. As my genius Math professor once said: "When you come to the oral exam session, I will ask you a question. In 99% of cases, the answer is: it depends..."