CS/CE/engineering majors...

[petrol]

Originally posted by dzadza

You interpreted my post the wrong way. I didn't say one is easier than the other. I said one is easier to go though college with a C+/B- GPA *avoiding* learning anything than the other.

OK, I know you're generalizing so I'll take that into account. But where I went to school, we weren't awarded a degree unless we had acquired the requisite skill. Maybe you're trying to make an observation about objective vs subjective criteria?

CS/prgramming is more objective because if it doesn't run, you dont pass?

I can't back you on that either... I squeeked through three semesters of Life Drawing with a C each semester because I didn't hone my skills, didn't improve enough, and simply didn't meet the standards of an established tradition of drawing the human form.

When we move into the upper levels, 300/400/500 level courses, we both still have to meet certain criteria. Who is to say a program which runs is 'A' material or 'B' material? A program can run yet fail to be elegant... same thing for a work of art. It may convey a message/emotion yet be only mediocre.

So, back to your statement - and I'm not trying to bust balls here - but...

None of us can make it through a halfway decent school yet learn nothing. No one with a degree (not the mail-in sort) lacks skill.

What it seems to be coming down to for you, is what you are thinking of as 'skill' and 'something learned'. While you are cetainly entitled to your own system of values, I just hope you'll realize what you're saying.

Again, it's my own values, but I don't place more value on the programmer than I do the artist or historian.

[dialectics]

Originally posted by deanna11

the variation: structural components and some graphics

i think i love you

[thehacker]

Originally posted by dialectics

i think i love you

back off, man!

i saw deanna first

j/k!

[dialectics]

At least where I come from, nobody ever graded you on whether or not your program runs. If it doesn't run you shouldn't even be walking in the door.

A good programmer is a combination of genius, madman, artist and god. we create living worlds out of sheer will, and then bend them, shape them any way we want them (sorry i had to do that).

just like nobody can ever teach you to how to be an artist, only how to hold the brush, nobody can ever teach you elegance in code - just show you examples. film school can teach you how to operate a bolex, arri, nagra, DAT tape, mixer, steenbeck or avid, but they can't teach you how to manage a crew of 20 people and a bar owner staying up 8 hours after closing when one actress fucks up her lines. they can teach you technique, but technique alone won't make you a filmmaker - that is talent, instinct, eye and mind. what they can give you is a place to work, access to the equipment you need and the time to experiment and hone your skills.

i personally found my cs classes to be a joke - so much was abstracted away from practicality, so much was hidden from you. but that was because it came easy to me. i found my film classes to be "easy" but time consuming because i loved what i did and worked on perfection. my engineering classes, on the other hand, beat the living sh*t out of me. i am not a practical person and i live in the clouds. an i.t. job would kill me, and i would most likely take down others with me (hence no i.t. for me).

it is really the physicists who should be speaking up here - they are the ones with the hardest work - grounded in fantasy and soaring above reality they must think abstractly in terms of the world as created by a higher power, in other words they have to reverse engineer god.

i have seen many people come out of C.S. programs and not know shit from either the practical or abstract side of computers. how they did it is completely beyond me.

i don't think i'm taking a stand on either side here except to say that when we computer people take liberal arts and creative arts classes, they are our "easy a's". but then again, i took computer science classes for the same reason. your job is to be as well rounded as possible - no knowledge will hurt you, only improve your angle on what you love.

rob

[dialectics]

Originally posted by thehacker

back off, man!

i saw deanna first

j/k!

hahahaha maybe she's one of these:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/05/26/free_love/index.html

sorry d, you've just made your way onto a pedestal

rob

[PinkFloyd40]

Originally posted by dialectics

At least where I come from, nobody ever graded you on whether or not your program runs. If it doesn't run you shouldn't even be walking in the door.

A good programmer is a combination of genius, madman, artist and god. we create living worlds out of sheer will, and then bend them, shape them any way we want them (sorry i had to do that).

just like nobody can ever teach you to how to be an artist, only how to hold the brush, nobody can ever teach you elegance in code - just show you examples. film school can teach you how to operate a bolex, arri, nagra, DAT tape, mixer, steenbeck or avid, but they can't teach you how to manage a crew of 20 people and a bar owner staying up 8 hours after closing when one actress fucks up her lines. they can teach you technique, but technique alone won't make you a filmmaker - that is talent, instinct, eye and mind. what they can give you is a place to work, access to the equipment you need and the time to experiment and hone your skills.

i personally found my cs classes to be a joke - so much was abstracted away from practicality, so much was hidden from you. but that was because it came easy to me. i found my film classes to be "easy" but time consuming because i loved what i did and worked on perfection. my engineering classes, on the other hand, beat the living sh*t out of me. i am not a practical person and i live in the clouds. an i.t. job would kill me, and i would most likely take down others with me (hence no i.t. for me).

it is really the physicists who should be speaking up here - they are the ones with the hardest work - grounded in fantasy and soaring above reality they must think abstractly in terms of the world as created by a higher power, in other words they have to reverse engineer god.

i have seen many people come out of C.S. programs and not know shit from either the practical or abstract side of computers. how they did it is completely beyond me.

i don't think i'm taking a stand on either side here except to say that when we computer people take liberal arts and creative arts classes, they are our "easy a's". but then again, i took computer science classes for the same reason. your job is to be as well rounded as possible - no knowledge will hurt you, only improve your angle on what you love.

rob

i think the point is that while you may have it tough, that doens't mean others dont' have it as tough or tougher then you just b/c of your major..

for example.. imagine if you wrote the perfect program(or so you thought) and maybe it would be an A, but a number of people just mastered theirs to a higher level, so you only get a B or maybe even a C..

now you not only have the pressure of the work, but the added competition as well.. that is my current situation and i happen to think its quite difficult.. does it make my situation harder then yours?

nope.. just different..

[a_jenkins]

>i have seen many people come out of C.S. programs and not >know shit from either the practical or abstract side of >computers. how they did it is completely beyond me.

I graduated from a respected school with a B average and learned pretty much nothing from my CS major. My approach was pretty simple. The first skill I mastered was the ability to sound a lot smarter and knowledgable than I really am. Also, I'm not Mr. Personality or anything, but compared to the CS tools at my school I pretty much was and that helped a lot. Basically in the beginning of the semester I would approach someone I knew was really smart and strike up some conversation. Since I sounded fairly skilled and these poor saps were dying for "cool friends" I could work my way into a group of genius level programmers. They would quickly figure out that I was the weak link and do all the work. My other technique was to get in good with the professors. Although I rarely went to class, I would try to go by office hours often and ask intelligent questions and generally give the impression I was on top of things. The weakness in my scam was exams, which I'd usually mess up real bad. However, group work was always worth much more than the exams and since the professors were duped into thinking I was keeping up, I could usually convince them to discount the tests to some extent by saying I must have been having a bad day or something. Throughout school I was very worried that in the real world I would be exposed for the fraud that I am and I'd have a hard time getting or keeping a job. As it turns out though, the real world is full of suckers and I still get more credit and props than I deserve. From my experience, I have to say that deception, manipulation, and smooth talking are much more useful in this industry than true skill or intellect. I kind of feel sorry for the fools who actually put forth a lot of effort in classes and learn things the "right way", but hey no one put a gun to their head and forced them to not cut corners.

[PinkFloyd40]

Originally posted by a_jenkins

>deception, manipulation, and smooth talking are much more useful in this industry than true skill or intellect..

bingo..

that way in all industries..

[dzadza]

Originally posted by petrol

None of us can make it through a halfway decent school yet learn nothing. No one with a degree (not the mail-in sort) lacks skill.

I think the root of our disagreement is here. I say the majority lacks skill. May be we have different standards. Let me try to define better what I mean by skill, may be that will be helpful here. To me a person with skill would mean that he is capable of doing something I would not be able to do without those four years of work. I majored in computer science and mathematics, but I have taken courses in many different areas. I really liked Econ, so I took a number of 300-400 level courses in the business school. And it all went just fine. What did I find out? The seniors from the business school were the ones approaching me with questions while preparing for exams. Or there were a couple of literature courses, one on contemporary poetry, where almost everyone in class was one or two semesters away from graduating with a degree in English. I did a decent amount of work in that class and pulled a fair B+, above averate in the class. Now there were several students in that class that had skill, those guys could write, and pulled the A's. I couldn't compete with them. But as far as the rest of the class goes, did they have skill? I would say no. I have come across so many people that wonder across departments, not knowing what they want to do, taking a class here a class there, and finally just settling on something, say history, just so that they can pass those classes, get the 130 credits and pull their degree. I do not value a programmer more than a historian, not at all, but I wouldn't call the person I just described a historian. And I am not saying that people in computer science don't pull degrees without really learning a thing. This last example by a_jenkins is just a perfect example of that. I just tend to think it's hard to do it in technical departments.

[dzadza]

Originally posted by a_jenkins

>From my experience, I have to say that deception, manipulation, and smooth talking are much more useful in this industry than true skill or intellect.

I disagree. At least not from my experience. You can pull a lot with manipulation and smooth talking until you bump into someone who takes no bullshit. I interviewed once this guy in late 30's early 40's with well over 10 years of experience in programming who didn't know shit. And what happened... The most embarassing moment in his life. He ran out of my office so quickly that I didn't even have a chance to tell him how interested we were in hiring him.

[thehacker]

Originally posted by a_jenkins

As it turns out though, the real world is full of suckers and I still get more credit and props than I deserve. From my experience, I have to say that deception, manipulation, and smooth talking are much more useful in this industry than true skill or intellect. I kind of feel sorry for the fools who actually put forth a lot of effort in classes and learn things the "right way", but hey no one put a gun to their head and forced them to not cut corners.

ohmyfuckinggodwhatasadfruitlesslifeyoumustlead!

whatever happened to going home at the end of the day feeling you'd actually MADE something TANGIBLE instead of just FEEDING OFF the EFFORTS OF OTHERS?!

[JonStephen]

Alright everyone, its time for me to admit it.

I too am a civil engineer, except I don't pursue a career in it.

Believe it or not I have a degree, its a good one with a good GPA and all, but I don't have any interest in it right now.........it would just get in the way of my nightlife and my immediate ambitions.

Not to mention all the engineers I know from school have boring jobs with jobs that they can't really advance into any power unless they get more education.

It always came natural to me, the whole math and equations thing and all, so I can't really say that it is worse than writing a ten page paper, because I would less rather write.

[a_jenkins]

Originally posted by thehacker

ohmyfuckinggodwhatasadfruitlesslifeyoumustlead!

whatever happened to going home at the end of the day feeling you'd actually MADE something TANGIBLE instead of just FEEDING OFF the EFFORTS OF OTHERS?!

I think if I behaved as a "model employee" I still wouldn't go home at the end of the day feeling like I made something tangible. It comes down to the fact that I have no passion for computer work. I see it as a job that gets me the money to do the things I really want to do in life. It sounds like you have the good fortune of doing something you love for a living. That is really wonderful, but not all of us are defined by our careers. What makes my life not sad and fruitless are my friends, hobbies, and my life outside of work. What makes work tolerable is the great feeling I get from feeding off the efforts of others.

Originally posted by dzadza

I disagree. At least not from my experience. You can pull a lot with manipulation and smooth talking until you bump into someone who takes no bullshit. I interviewed once this guy in late 30's early 40's with well over 10 years of experience in programming who didn't know shit. And what happened... The most embarassing moment in his life. He ran out of my office so quickly that I didn't even have a chance to tell him how interested we were in hiring him.

This is something that worries me to an extent. I always feel like someone will catch on to my conniving ways and I won't be able to talk my way out of the situation. I thought I was done for a couple months back when my boss, who I had completely fooled, was laid off and the new supervisor was a real hands on programmer type. However, it's been the same deal with the new guy.. I find it unbelievable though that I'll be able to pull this off for the rest of my life. Eventually I'm sure someone will expose me. I think, though, that there are a lot more marks out there than people who'll catch on and in the long run I should be alright even though I may have to take some lumps and look stupid once in a while.

[scoob-e]

said it before and ill say it again, Thank God I Am A Networker.