/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10739397
just do what you want. don't let the /sci/ memes get to you

>>10739397
The only correct answer is, if you want to study computer science, you MUST also do a full major of mathematics alongside, as a double major.

>>10739397
do whatever you think you'll be better at, and such that you will enjoy working hard. Dont fall for idiotic memes

God bless Sseth

>>10739413
im doing cs but ill just double major without a seconds major, sounds a bit retarded.
Those two degrees already have pretty large overlaps (compared to most things)

>>10739455
Just make sure you do. CS is a form of applied mathematics, learning a shitloads of extra math will be useful.

>>10739457
>just finished first sem
>been studying calc1 and calc2+vec calc on the side
>still have to fucking go back from time to time to Israel Algebra or Lang to remember some stupid trivial law cuz i didnt practice it enough in HS
>mfw family telling me to get a job over summer while all i do is read stewart

>>10739462
This is why you need to practice before your brain starts to reduce in neuroplasticity in your mid-to-late twenties.

>>10739466
>19
feels good being a retard

>>10739477
Bruh...

>>10739397
>being retarded enough to fall for memes
Your loss is our gain OP.
Also what country do you live in?
If it's a shithole like Eastern Europe, India, China, or Australia then your schools are a joke and your cs education will be a joke when compared to a US university.

>>10739413
This is head and shoulder the dumbest advice people here give on /sci/. Traditional math classes are for the most part far removed from CS math. There is no benefit to double majoring. Its just a waste of time.
I actually wonder who was dumb enough to fall for this terrible advice.

>>10739478
it fucking sucks when im answering allot of questions in labs while everyone else thinks about it. but when the questions where to just factor or simplify i would have to try and think about it while for everyone else it was a reflex
fml

>>10739500
dunno about cs education but here in AUS we have [nearly] mandatory calculus by 11th grade with people taking calc2 in Year 12

>nearly
everyone who ever goes to university takes that type of math, but not everyone has to

>>10739511
Yup, it feels bad when people have better mental math than you.

pic unrelated

>>10739504
>whos dumb enough to fall for this
i can already tell you are a retard.
anyone who isnt a code monkey and is remotely interested in theory will eventually learn more about pure math just because they are interested in it.
Its natural for people in STEM to do so, you 'DONT HAVE TO' but only a retard pajeet/FOB wont have the autonomy to atleast pursue some pure math (even if its just on their own time)

>>10739519
Is that the Indian chick?

>>10739504 see: >>10739525
This is why. If you want to be a Pajeet, don't learn the extra mathematics, or better yet, don't do computer science, go and do software engineering. That way, you won't denigrate the field, because if you're doing computer science, you should be looking into research, for which the extra mathematics will benefit you.

>>10739530
I wouldn't know.

>>10739515
Aussie unis are a joke, sorry to break it to you.

>>10739397
>computer engineering
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaased

It removes the autism from compsci and replaces it with implementation and cool products.

>>10739397
Ask yourself this: do you wan't to be the dude who builds the fighter jet, or the one who flies it?

>>10739525
>>10739533
Okay you stupid fucks.
Explain to me how learning differential equations or analysis will be useful in a CS degree. Go ahead retards. Explain it to me. You idiots are no better than Pajeets. You're just too stupid to see it.

In a CS education you're required to take core math classes that are useful for your major. These are most of the time calc 1-3, multivariable calc, linear algebra, stats, 1 or 2 discrete math classes, automata, and algorithms. With electives you can further get math classes that are actually useful for tcs.
You can take classes on numerical analysis, combinatorics, optimization, cryptography, graph theory, etc. You could basically take everything that would prepare you for a master's in CS just by doing CS.

To major in math and take extra classes that have nothing to do with the math involved in cs is fucking stupid. How is taking 2 classes in real analysis going to help you? It's what a braindead retard desperate for approval would do. Approval from who? Are you really dumb enough to let a bunch of trolls in an online forum dictate your life? Think dumbfucks.
It's evident none of you have studied CS or live in a third world country with subpar educational standards. The real world is nothing like /sci/ delusions and the sad part is there are so many gullible fools who took your terrible advice.

>>10739784
actually i know an applied algebraic geometry book that talks about it's applications to robotics... soooo

>>10739397

>>10739803
anon it's robotics not robotiCS. computer science is a different field from robotics.

>>10739397
>pic unrelated
fag

>>10739744
This. CS is for fags.

>>10739784
They’re incredibly useful because they pertain to CS, not software engineering. Classic CS problems from the 80s were heavy on combinatorics, but the field has evolved and is more all encompassing now.
>differentials
Indispensable for graphics and differential geometry needed for visualization. Look at any paper from the CMU or Stanford graphics group. From a pure theory perspective, differentials aren’t motivated until you understand that recurrences re discretized differential equations. It’s there in research, but I can see the argument that partial differentials isn’t useful. I’d say ordinary differentials are important for breadth alone. PDE’s usually touches on Fourier theory, which is the WAY more important part because that’s insanely important in noise stability and TCS topics.
>analysis
See above. Analysis is the name of the game for tricky runtimes. You *have* to use it for randomized algorithms to show that you fall within arbitrary delta of a correct answer. It’s used a fuckton in average case analysis..which is why most CS programs don’t touch on it until much later. Literally read about it in Knuth and watch him motivate learning about dirichlet and powerful analytic tools. I don’t think I’ve met a TCS researcher with whom measure and metric spaces, bounding arguments, convergence theorems, etc. wasn’t insanely useful.
I double majored in math and CS during undergrad. All of the traditional math topics, yes even continuous math, show up in CS grad. They teach you basic shit in undergrad because they cater to the lowest common denominator who wants to do basic software engineering, but CS as a field uses all that “irrelevant” math. Literally pick up any theory paper and this is evident. How do you expect to prove something like KKL or Friedgut’s theorem in CS with no analytic background? Why do you think most TCS researchers either majored in math or double majored in math and CS?

>>10739877
>>10739784
Oh also, all of asymptotic analysis is...well analysis. Knuth asks you to do tricky line integrals in the asymptotics chapter of concrete mathematics...because it’s what every CS undergrad should be able to do to have a proper mathematical understanding of CS. Bear in mind that it’s what he believes should be a foundation, not even “special application” or even advanced undergrad. And he’s not alone in this school of thought: dijkstra was another who posted a lot about this.
So yeah, for the basics of software development and a form of CS that completely ignores theory research, some systems research, etc., your argument holds...but that really just leaves some algorithms topics, some optimization topics, and ML left to be taught. This is the suite of memey data science when removed from the math. Of course, the reality is that math is the main focus of study in TCS and that contributed tenfold to all other parts of CS
>>10739811
Computational robotics is insanely important. Traditional engineering would concern itself with control, power delivery, design of parts, and use of materials. The problems on the CS side are computer vision, resolving movement on surface deformation, resolving consensus in decision making from multiple stimuli, lots of fucking geometry, etc.
>>10739744
This is the problem with engineering students. They want to absorb CS topics into engineering as a whole because they see the field as a collection of methods in solving technology problems. They consider themselves superior because they do the hardware side of EE (where they derive the “I know how to make stuff” ego from) and like the basic bitch CS code, like data structures, one algo course, etc. CS has long since been the mathematical investigation of various theories offshoot from traditional math..it has little bearing on engineering culture. Yeah, you solve problems in engineering in their purest form, but it’s distinctly math.

>>10739803
>>10739811
Also algebraic geometry is the biggest lead on P vs. NP right now because it’s the forefront of the study of geometric complexity theory..this stuff isn’t hard to look up. The “when will I ever use this” question is very rote and has well documented responses. Literally, rejecting math as a CS student is the #1 fuckin calling card of a brainlet codemonkey. You’re throwing away the rigor and tools for the investigation of your study. You cannot understand the workings of CS without sophisticated mathematics. If you bring me codeshit..that just sort of proves my point, because you’re then touting software engineering and design principles in place of actual CS.

Don’t worry, everyone on here who talks about CS talks about shit not even in CS. If you are in US it’s good, otherwise I have no idea.

>>10739739
i dont doubt that australian undergraduate (or even graduate) education isnt on the same standard as whats offered by the best in other western education - for example in nordic countries, britain or america.
But you can supplement knowledge from other universities courses if you simply search the syllabi and find those books and lectures for yourself... its not some arcane knowledge, you just need autonomy
If its about a peace of paper then yeah ur fucked, but if you want to know something nothing will change (we even have 3 years as a standard for allot of STEM studies + work 6-12months you get from a degree, so its more about getting you to work as soon as possible - nobody is trying to hide that lol)

>>10739784
Okay you stupid fuck.
Explain to me how I got a HD(98%) on my end of the year portfolio presentation in a CS (computer science also known as compsci) degree when most of my presentation was based on explaining/proof of programming concepts via mathematics?
But common... its not about things that are obvious in their relation; one can study: linguistics and physics, philosophy and mathematics etc.etc. and from those different combinations they can develop their ability to understand what they love doing ( since you cant really find every single thing you're looking for in one specific degree)

I would have to say that YES, >>10739413 is retarded ... if you read it in a very literal sense. You dont have to go though formal education if you dont want to, especially since you already completed a degree you will have experience in studying at that level on your own and will know what materials are needed

Im not saying that im right and you are wrong, just dont take it as a yes/no or you should/shouldnt do something but more of implied evolution of what you are already doing - and it just happens that allot of people i knew in CS end up doing pure-math, engineering etc.

>>10739397
you should go to >>>/g/ a board entirely dedicated to discussing computer science, software development and engineering. if the quality of discussion on the tech board is so bad you have to spam the science and math board maybe you people are just stupid

>>10740069
Lol, if you ever ask something that's not at worst programming ie: anything close to math or engineering - you will be told to fuck of to /sci/ and your thread 404s
This is a better place to ask then g

>>10740069
/g/ is celldwelling autists who obsess over anime (more than here)

there's nothing to be gained over there than potential coding advice which you might as well be granted elsewhere. Most of it all is just flamewars about products they can't even afford to buy anyway or languages they don't master

Just study math and learn CS on the side. Ever notice the best computer scientists are mathematicians? Really makes you think.

>>10739397
If you are set on becoming a programmer then it doesn't matter.
I didn't want to do anything prior to graduation and was dead set on CS, but after my first semester I knew that programming wasnt for me (I've been doing it before middle school on-and-off and I thought there would be more to it, I was wrong lol), hated culture and I found interest in math.
But since by luck I had a good tutor he encouraged me to explore mathematics and over time I realised that I loved computational theory and not programming and I developed an ability to explain and related it to mathematics + maths is pretty addictive

>>10740080
>>10740082
I wonder why the tech board is so bad that the CS/CE students have to come to this place to ask questions. Same interesting phenomena with /his/ and /lit/ if you have a question about linguistics, philosophy or political theory you would never post it on /his/ in spite of it being the humanities board.

>>10740092
*hated tech culture
>>10740094
It took you a while I'm guessing

>>10739397
I'll ask you the question no one ever seems to ask: what sort of problems do you want to work on in your programming career?

>>10740094
I looked at /g/ threads from 2013 and I would like to you if I said I saw any meta threads at all, difference in quality and distinction between non board related topics was very clear, and when people posted /b/tier shit it would be easy to ignore and wasn't ingrained into the board eco system.
It's a trend that happened with the popularity of Pol due to Crimea/trump/kekistan bullshit that drove traffic to the site and over time the boards changed with shit tons of threads about meta garbage and wojaks

>>10740113
*say I didn't see any
Autocorrect on Android is terrible for shit posting

>>10740069
>>10740082
>>10740094
/g/ has literally no discussion pertaining to computer science. They talk about tech culture and occasionally software engineering, but most of them are brainlets slain by fizzbuzz and calc 2. There is no actual academic CS discussion going on there. The closest you have to that is cstheory stackexchange and math exchange. Here, if you bring up a theoretical CS problem, people will meme you into existence or they won't have the background because /sci/ unironically has no idea what they're talking about when it comes to TCS, and those that do know don't post here because they know the community isn't active here.
>>10740088
If you go to even a half decent school, your math and CS departments should be either joint or very closely related on a paper trail of publication authorships. There are a lot of math topics that you don't get full exposure to in the math department alone, like complexity, higher level combinatorics, etc. So I'd say double majoring is by far the easiest way to get into *all* of it. I did that + some systems courses because OS and embedded are comfy practical skills, but I focused heavily into theory and pure math in grad school.
>>10740092
That's a cool story anon. I always got bored with nonsystems programming assignments since it felt like I was doing technician work when I really got into it so I could solve hard problems and encounter interesting theory. I always liked math but thought math was unemployable. After realizing that I should just go for it, I double majored, found that I only really like systems programming since that's where you distill problems into solution + design rather than faffing about trivial bullshit, but that complexity theory and mathematical analysis were my 2 big passions. I got into a great grad school and have never looked back since.

>>10739397
>>10740223
Adding onto this, compare:
http://www.cs.tau.ac.il/~amnon/Classes/2016-PRG/Analysis-Of-Boolean-Functions.pdf
Which is the text to an undergrad course at CMU
and:
>>>/g/71512012
>>>/g/71506151
The average denizen of /g/ bringing up anything related to "CS"

This thread is a oxymoron ; I fucking hate meta threads, but i really like talking about how shit meta threads are (which is just as meta)

Lets all agree to not make shit like this anymore
:^)

>>10740252
this isn't "meta"
I don't like CS hate threads but what are you talking about? If you're trying to make a meta joke it's fallen flat on its face

>>10740267
talking about the state of something is pretty meta wouldn't you say ?
and he really should have just posted it on g...
it has nothing to do with science as he stated that
>i want to do programming
he didnt ask for suggestions related to math or science - that which this board is concerned with
yes, g is a shit hole but there are a good majority who specifically study CS, and those people can talk to him about programming - again, programming being the object that /g/ as a sub-site is concerned with since it falls under technology and not mathematics in general terms (and he is talking about programming in general terms)

Sauce for op's pic?

>>10739397
>I want to do professional programming but the compsci memes dont make it look very attractive
>majoring in CS to be a code monkey
kys, you're the reason CS degrees are fucking garbage and the laughing stock of stem.

>>10739462
Read Spivak anon

>>10740650
Dont know why i would use his work, i glanced over his work
I mean my knowledge or absence of it in algebra is what has been holding me back from doing calculus properly, how will books on calculus help me ? Unless he goes over ideas in algebra those books arent particularly interesting
Israel's book is already 150 pages long so i think thats a perfect size for quick revision

>>10740242
Lol that’s a damn shame. Codemonkeys bring a bad name to TCS

>>10739803
Thanks for reminding me anon, my uni offered a class in computational geometry for CS majors.
So again, what benefit would there be in studying math?
I have yet to hear a useful math subject that wasn't explored in cs.

>>10739911
When did I reject math?
Are you illiterate?
Computational geometry is also offered at many unis, it was at mine.

What I'm trying to get you idiots to understand is double majoring is pointless. If you want to focus on math all useful math class are already offered in cs departments. You simply waste time by double majoring in math. There is no benefit in a double major. I have yet to hear one math class which is useful for CS which isn't already offered in CS departments.

>>10739413
>if you want to study computer science, you MUST also do a full major of mathematics alongside, as a double major.
ahahaha. No.

Follow this guy's advice if you want a life of depression and suicidal thoughts because precisely zilch of the fascinating math you learned in university has anything remotely to do with your code monkey job.

>>10741097
TCS has it all, but in undergrad researchers in continuous topics tend to list their classes through the math department while researchers in discrete topics do it through some of the undergrad CS listings (think topics in combinatorics vs topics in analysis). At my school, some people have joint professorship in the math and CS departments and have listings for classes in different topics.

So basically, the idea is exposure. Not every useful math topic is covered in CS undergrad; it's too broad for a single themed curriculum.

>>10741107
>Computational geometry
Are you fucking dense? We're talking about algebraic geometry, which is not the field of computational geometry. That is, Delauney triangulation and finding the zeroes of polynomials are two different things. Even in grad, for CS and physics, you take algebraic geometry classes in the math department.
>What I'm trying to get you idiots to understand is double majoring is pointless.
No, it really isn't. CS departments focus heavily in software engineering to them to really focus on theory for more intense students. I mean, I really liked my undergrad, and I exhausted the mathematical topics in 3 years, while I found even more useful stuff in the math department. If you wanna do anything in grad school, especially pertaining to theory, double majoring is a must.
> If you want to focus on math all useful math class are already offered in cs departments. You simply waste time by double majoring in math. There is no benefit in a double major. I have yet to hear one math class which is useful for CS which isn't already offered in CS departments.
How can you say there's no benefit? I did a fuckton of work in undergrad for the fun and because I wanted to set myself up for grad school. I got a lot of perspectives from multiple researchers, a fuck ton of mathematical maturity my peers didn't have, and a wide range of experience in math and science applications that helped me think of 2 novel ideas for my first papers in grad school.
Also, as to " useful classes for CS in math:
Do CS departments list:
Abstract algebra (which is the poster child for higher systems work in compiler semantics, ECC, most theorems in TCS, etc)
category theory, see above
continuous and discrete probability and stochastic theory
game theory
information theory
analytic number theory

The list goes on. I listed out stuff used in mainstream nontrivial CS research. There's much more stuff in slightly more involved/slightly more niche topics in CS.

>>10741138
if OP wants a code monkey or programming job, then none of the math necessarily applies. Industry jobs in CS have a hard line of mathematical rigor: either they're jobs where you're working as an industry algorithmicist and research, which is working as an applied mathematician (cryptographer, algorithms, communication, optimization, etc) proving theorems and bounds for companies (see google research and amazon crypto), or you're a code monkey doing work to make a system of moving parts work. There are some people in scientific computing, crypto systems, etc. who do software engineering, but they're usually heavily pushed by their companies to get a PhD and start a senior engineer + research engineer position. So basically, you're either doing mathematically intense work or not. Traditional engineering isn't the most mathematical or scientific work, but it is a middle ground for people who want to apply basic scientific principles to business and production, so they generally like to shit on the demand for code monkeys. It's a form of massive compensation. Of course, there are exceptions ;)

What school has a good CS program? Every curriculum I've seen always requires around 4 code monkey courses like software engineering or good software practices and all the interesting shit like type theory and randomized algorithms is only taught in grad school.

It's really annoying how these software courses have more priority over cool shit like combinatorics and graph theory that are just dumped into discrete """math""" courses.

>>10741223
Berkeley, Stanford, CMU, MIT, UoTexas-A, UMich, UCLA, Rutgers-NB, etc. These are all schools that have great theory CS and math programs. As an undergrad you won't be spooned hard material in a CS program unless you go get it, because CS professors are almost all focused on research and teach their hard courses in introductory grad (which you should take as a CS student). Double majoring is still recommended.

>>10739877
>Indispensable for graphics and differential geometry needed for visualization
>graphics
Are you sure you're not thinking of linear algebra? Because to me it looks like you are.
I never took computer vision but a quick Google search shows to me differential equations is hardly used there.
I do know some differential equations through physics, I'm not going to claim it's enough to substitute a whole class cause that's false, but I know enough that I wouldn't feel completely lost if I needed to learn the subject in depth in the future.

As for analysis, I will say that as far as math students explained analysis to me they made it seem like hardcore calculus but now that I look at some of the subject areas I'm familiar with them because of cs. Some areas look far removed from CS.
While I can see the use I doubt the other areas of the class that relate nothing to CS would be useful and even then you could self study the class.
There are still a lot of things in math that you learn which relate nothing to CS. Hence why I'm saying it's pointless. I can see the logic in minoring but double majoring is too much

Look, here's the faculty at UC Berkeley for theoretical CS
https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Areas/THY/
What you'll notice is most didn't major in math for undergrad and most of those who did got their degrees in the 80s or before in a time when CS wasn't as established as it is today. I'm sure if you look at any other department you'll see a similar pattern. You simply don't need to major in math. Funny thing is now that I've been looking at a math degree it doesn't look too foreign to me since many of the topics are covered in cs. I can see the use of going in depth on some of them but then I'm reminded CS offered electives that did go in-depth on those subject areas.

When did I call math irrelevant? Math is very useful, I feel a CS degree should be full of it like mine was. But you don't need to major in math for tcs.

>>10741146
>So basically, the idea is exposure. Not every useful math topic is covered in CS undergrad; it's too broad for a single themed curriculum.
Exactly.
There are many topics that you could learn more in depth but instead of double majoring in math why not self teach?
If you're really interested in that field you'll be more than motivated to self teach. To get people who know not what they want to do to double major in math and CS is ridiculous. For most it won't help them at all.

>>10741298
I'll also add that >>10741187 is right if you really really want to do advanced algorithmic or whatever mathematical stuff, the vast majority of (high paying) jobs in _software engineering_ are about programming and not even CS, let alone math.

>>10741175
>CS departments focus heavily in software engineering
Oh really. Post proof then. Go ahead. Surely it'll be easy to prove since you're so certain of it.

Okay let's put it this way.
You guys are obsessed with academia which I understand. But do you think the average student whether in math or CS cares for academia? No.
Now let's put it this way. You guys are obsessed with theoretical CS. Do you really think the average person who goes into graduate CS plans on doing theoretical CS? No.
You realize fields like architecture, security, networks, etc. are even more popular, right? Machine learning is also hella popular but most graduate programs teach you what you need to know. Sure there is benefit in double majoring in math here but it's not required.
So do some students need algebraic geometry? Yes I'm sure many do. But do the majority need to take a whole class on it? Fucking no.

You people are advising any gullible retard who comes along to double major in math and CS when this only pertains to a minority of a minority.
Can you not see how fucking stupid that is?

>>10739397
Applied Math or Physics and do programming as a hobby. Companies don't really care about your degree as long as you know your stuff and Comp sci mostly likely only brings you into database stuff and other boring shit.

Guys, is master's in applied compsci at Concordia University Montreal among the toughest to finish and graduate from (e.g.: hard to maintain good grades)?

>>10739397
>>10740316
I, too, would like to know the source.

>>10742640
I also want to know about this.

>>10742741
Off the cuff, that looks like some incase face.

>>10739397
May Sseth be blessed
Also, If I had the oportunity of coursing Eletrical Engeneering or Computer Science what would /sci/ recomend? I have some very basic knowledge of C++ and some other useless shit like ladder or arduino, on the other hand, I have worked as a electrician for a few years (family business), I just want to have a stable income before china takes over the world I don't necessarily have grand aspirations or anything...

>>10743517
>I just want to have a stable income before china takes over the world I don't necessarily have grand aspirations or anything...
CS, EE is dead.

If you want to do freelance learn web design stuff. HTML, CSS, Javascript, have a familiarity with wordpress, and learn Java if you want to do apps.

If you want to work for a company just go on whatever job posting site and look up "programmer" and then see what the requirements are. Then learn those requirements.

Without a degree, generally, you'll have an easier time getting front end positions as opposed to back end ones.

If you want to be a programmer, and get a degree, I would suggest doing an engineering or mathematics program alongside self teaching yourself the major languages as opposed to a comp-sci degree. You'll stand out.

>>10743517
Self teach yourself programming and comp-sci, and get a degree in mathematics. Mathematics is harder to self teach, and it stands out as looking more difficult than an engineering degree.

>>10739810
There are, without a doubt, too many courses in that study plan. Whatever university you are considering applying to just make sure they have at most 3 courses per semester, or else they'll all be watered down versions.

>>10743517
Arudino isn't a good representation of EE, just take a digital logic class and you'll know immedietly if you hate EE. Don't fall for the self taught programmer bait either unless you want to be a literal codemonkey, those guys don't know shit about what happening behind the scenes.

How's master of applied CS (non-thesis)? Is it suicide-triggering?

>>10739397
bump

>>10743611
8/10 b8, almost fell for it.

>>10743549
>and it stands out as looking more difficult than an engineering degree.
top fucking kek
Math is not harder than any engineering field or CS for that matter. Don't delude yourself.

gimme the fucking sauce

>>10741336
Based CS Chad putting these math nerds in their place

>>10741138
If OP wants to Pajeet, do software engineering, not CS. Stop polluting and corrupting our field in the minds of the general public, thanks.
I'm tired of people looking at me and going:
>Oh whoa, so do you want to work for Microsoft?!
No, no, I don't.

What do you think about Master of Computer Science? Is it a lot more torturing than Bachelor of Computer Science?

CompSci is fine if you apply yourself and actually learn and constantly advance your knowledge past the minimal level required to pass.

If you're not keen on CompSci for whatever reason but you're interested in tech think about Electrical Engineering.

>>10739462

>Lang and Gelfand
>Stewart

This is why you're failing my man. Stroud and Spivak are who you should be reading. Also practice.

I am so stupid that I can't create merge procedure for mergesort.
I should not study compsci, my brains deserve only monkey-level job.

>>10739397
>I want to make money off computers, but don't want to understand shit about them.

Do a business administration degree.
You will need to be able to produce large volumes of written and spoken bullshit, but you'll make it.

>>10741336
>Oh really. Post proof then.
I'm not going to sift through many curricula to spell out the obvious. A typical CS program is:
>calc 1-2
>intro to linear algebra
>data structures
>discrete 1 (intro to proofs) and discrete 2 (discrete probability and statistics)
>computer architecture
>intermediate algorithms
and then the rest is electives. There are systems electives, graphics electives, compiler electives, software development electives, but the core of them are based on skills in producing a codebase. Theory electives across the board are sparse but there are exceptions. It's not a bad curriculum by any means, and by all means, it's good to have breadth, but it's one that hones in heavily on these topics as a way to enter the service economy, rather than teaching CS in an academic sense.
>You guys are obsessed with academia which I understand. But do you think the average student whether in math or CS cares for academia? No.
For math, yes they obviously care lol. The whole point of the math degree is that it's a step into grad school. It's useless for industry unless you pair it with a degree or do it for academia. I don't think CS should give up everything that's non theory, but that CS should have a much more rigorous backing that has a foot in industry and a foot in theory.
>You guys are obsessed with theoretical CS.
You're querying /sci/ for this, a board about academic culture and academia. TCS and systems research are the research cultures in different sects of CS. Of course I'm gonna espouse those efforts and give you my perspective: It's an incredibly interesting field with hard work and good money, but it's hard work. Even fucking systems has this math featured, if you look at Leslie Lamport's work or anything in the asynchronous computability thesis, etc. I'm suggesting the average person do math + CS if they want to do grad school. I've suggested this multiple times in the thread lol.

>>10741336
>You realize fields like architecture, security, networks, etc. are even more popular, right?
Yeah I realize they're popular, but systems researchers need some baseline math in them too. Obviously you can do it without the math degree; it's not a hard cutoff in systems topics because they teach you in grad school, but I'm arguing it makes life easier in the long run if you wanna do research to have a very solid foundation of math :). I'm saying that double majoring in math and CS puts you way ahead of the competition, exposes you to interesting topics early, and helps save you time if you know you wanna go to grad school.
> Yes I'm sure many do. But do the majority need to take a whole class on it?
I'm not arguing for an upper level elective. I'm arguing that the math used to properly study CS topics are scattered in CS and math departments. I'm saying that it's a very good idea for both breadth and depth to take both majors because you gain a wide understanding and maturity to tackle whatever problem you want.
>You people are advising any gullible retard who comes along to double major in math and CS when this only pertains to a minority of a minority.
I maintain my position as advice to anyone interested in academia. I'm not the first post telling you that you have to do it. This advice comes from years of experience: if you want to do academic research in math or CS, a double major with a focus in TCS is invaluable. Again, soft suggestion, but heavily recommended.

>>10741269
>Are you sure you're not thinking of linear algebra? Because to me it looks like you are.
Linear algebra is important as part of the backbone and background knowledge, but differential geometry is also ridiculously important as well because all the linear algebra comes to life when you realize what you're using it for.
https://www.csd.cs.cmu.edu/course-profiles/15-458-Discrete-Differential-Geometry
http://brickisland.net/DDGSpring2016/grading-policy/
And I'm sure you can find more and more courses on the topic. This was a quick google search. Development for graphics is spread among many disciplines, but this is about creating libraries, graphics backends, understanding surfaces, why certain methods are used, etc. I don't know what part of graphics you're talking about.
>I never took computer vision
Are you illiterate? Vision and graphics are two different fields. Vision is about learning methods, which is heavy on earlier calculus, numerical methods, and machine learning techniques.

>As for analysis, I will say that as far as math students explained analysis to me they made it seem like hardcore calculus but now that I look at some of the subject areas I'm familiar with them because of cs.
It's not "hardcore calculus." It's why calculus works. Calculus can provide us with answers to interesting problems, but they're all on the bedrock of analysis, which extends further than what they teach you (starting by constructing the real numbers and then working up).
>Some areas look far removed from CS.
Some are, but a surprising number of them aren't. In fact, the most surprising aren't! Fourier theory shows up in the boolean cube analysis, since Kahn, Kalai, and Linial were the guys that brought that side of analysis into CS. There are another analytical topics in CS, such as all of asymptotics and randomized bounds.

>>10741269
>would be useful.. and even then you could self study the class.
Analysis is notoriously difficult for students and really benefits from in class instructor actually taking you through the intuition. It's one of the first exposures to tough rigor in math and CS. Knuth thought it was important. What argument do you have against it other than "it looks foreign" even though it's the basis of many academic CS arguments?
>I can see the logic in minoring but double majoring is too much
Not really. Again, I think your perspective comes from having a canon of CS topics that are heavily focused on undergrad -> industry topics, which focus on optimization, software engineering, numerical methods, etc. Which kind of avoid all the academic reasons to study classical math for its use in CS. That's fine as a personal thing, but saying "it's useless for CS" is incredibly naive and ignorant on its actual utility.
>What you'll notice is most didn't major in math for undergrad
...no dude, most of them are people who did math and CS, and EE. They all did CS PhD's, which is great because PhD CS is a great degree, but only a few of the primary ones have only a BS in CS. Most of them are CS and math, EE, or just math. I think this speaks to what theory needs.
I do agree that I want CS to develop further from the 80s so that it's a more legit degree, but there needs to be criticism.
>You simply don't need to major in math.
you don't have to major in any specific STEM. All slightly mathematical STEM subjects can study each other in grad if they so please. Math is what makes it easiest in the long run because it exposes you to what you'll need anyway.

None of my advice is hardline do this or die type shit. It's just my heavy recommendations based on considerations on what undergrad CS degrees suppress due to vested interest in industry topics; that's fine, but you ought to supplement with math, which is a heavily focused academic degree,if you wanna do grad

>>10741298
>There are many topics that you could learn more in depth but instead of double majoring in math why not self teach
If you're motivated, why not double major? It gives you active certification in order to do mathematical CS research, whereas self studying is subject to biases that skew your intuition, lack of time, etc etc. Taking the actual class reinforces the uses and intuition. I'd say self studying is important if you're at the level to do so professionally, but most people can't really do that with mathematics properly until an intro to proofs and analysis class.

>>10745493
http://ccny.smartcatalogiq.com/en/2017-2018/Undergraduate-Bulletin/The-Grove-School-of-Engineering/Department-of-Computer-Science/Computer-Science-Bachelor-of-Science-B-S
is this a bad program?

>>10739397
I studied psych in school and my first job was a script/programmer making 44kish a year

My only experience was the 2 beginning programming class/labs I took in college.

learned everything else on the job training

if you aint planning on grad school who fucking cares pleb

>>10745493
>I'm not going to sift through many curricula to spell out the obvious. A typical CS program is:
You're making a claim without evidence. Unless you can prove your claim it means squat.
And what uni's are you familiar with that only require those classes? Let me guess, you're not from the US?
No operating systems? stats? calc 3? And there multiple other requirements depending on the uni such as compilers and automata. I have a good feeling you're not from the US. Aussie and Euro uni's are often meh.
>rather than teaching CS in an academic sense.
Any good degree gives a decent amount of theory and a good amount of industry knowledge. Not everyone can do research, the uni and the community are better served if the school focuses on industry. You might not like it but that's the way the world is.

>For math, yes they obviously care lol.
Many people major in math because they want to teach, some hope to do actuary work, and some do other things. The vast majority of students who major in math don't go to grad school.
>I don't think CS should give up everything that's non theory but that CS should have a much more rigorous backing that has a foot in industry and a foot in theory.
I agree and the degree does a perfect job of this already. At least in the US. You've yet to prove otherwise. Its slanted towards industry, as it should be, but theory is not ignored.

>You're querying /sci/ for this, a board about academic culture and academia
Yes but do you know what are the biggest topics in CS academia? Cryptography, Machine learning, architecture, networks, graphics, embedded systems etc. Fields that a cs degree more than prepare students for. NOT TCS. The people who do TCS are but a minority in a minority. CS and math are broad fields. Its like you expects schools to teach everything to students when its just not possible.

The average person should not do CS and math. That is only required for a tiny minority and even then a minor in math would make more sense.

>>10745501
>but systems researchers need some baseline math in them too. Obviously you can do it without the math degree;
Exactly. You can do it with a math degree. Would it help? Sure but its mainly a waste of time. You can easily learn what you need without doing a double major.
>I'm arguing that the math used to properly study CS topics are scattered in CS and math departments
Then what math do you think a cs degree needs? Post your ideal CS degree for that matter. Also explain why you chose certain math classes.
>I'm saying that it's a very good idea for both breadth and dept
Its also a good idea to major in EE and CS but just because it is doesn't mean anyone has to.
>I maintain my position as advice to anyone interested in academia.
Did OP ever say he was interested in academia?
>if you want to do academic research in math or CS, a double major with a focus in TCS is invaluable
And we've already gone over this. This only applies to a minority of a minority. What math the average grad needs to learn can be learned without having to take another four year degree.

>>10745518
Don't ask me why I read visualization as vision, it just happened.
I'm sure grad programs require students to know the required differential geometry needed for the major. Just because it shows up doesn't mean they have to take another four year degree or they fail. How is this hard to understand?
>but they're all on the bedrock of analysis, which extends further than what they teach you
I feel like, at least from what I've seen, some of the topics in analysis are spread throughout a CS degree. Having CS students take analysis would be pretty useful but there's only so much you can teach and the way the education is set up the way the topics are explored works just fine. A lot of the stuff, as you yourself admit, isn't really helpful for cs. Now if it was offered as an elective that would be great.

>>10745531
>What argument do you have against it
Some stuff is pretty useful but some stuff is not so useful. The school is better served teaching other classes.
>Not really. Again, I think your perspective comes from having a canon of CS
Can you honestly say every single class you took for math was useful for CS?
>.no dude, most of them are people who did math and CS, and EE
okay lol desu I didn't bother counting so I spent some time looking at the faculty right now but it still proves a point. If you look at the EE's their research relates to signal processing, robotics, etc. Berkley CS is heavily intertwined with EE. Well, CS is in general desu.
Math and maybe cs(or physics for that one guy) is 8 people whereas just CS is 6 people. But note one very important detail I mentioned. The majority of people who are math undergrad got their degrees in the 80's or before. Only 3 have gotten their degree since the 90's and all but the asian guy (who apperently does research in stats and biosystems) double majored. For CS all 6 of them got their degree in the 90's and after. This makes sense as back in the 80's CS was not well established and those math guys are in a sense the pioneers of the fields. Since then as CS developed and became more established most people just do CS for undergrad. Note these are just the faculty for theory, if we add other faculty the number of CS undergrad gets bigger.

The idea that you need CS and math for undergrad is simply not true, and most young researchers just do CS for undergrad. Not math. The degree did develop since the 80's.
>you don't have to major in any specific STEM. All slightly mathematical STEM subjects can study each other in grad if they so please.
You're right, you should never limit yourself. Hell one of those Berkley guys did an undergrad in psychology and look at him now.
>Math is what makes it easiest in the long run
Not true. The mindset needed for physics, engineering, and even programming cs is completely different.

>>10745533
Honestly bro you write too much. Had to play vydia between replies. I'd prefer if you keep your post short and concise thanks but I'll understand if you can't.

By the way you're expressing your learning biases unto others. I barely learn anything in a classroom setting so in a sense I self taught my self everything. This is true for many people.

>>10745779
bro fuck outta here
Why do you feel the need to ask someone this?
What in that degree makes you think its in any way a bad program?
You need to stop believing /sci/ memes and realize the vast majority of American CS degrees are fine.
That degree is perfectly fine which makes your question even more pointless.

>>10744770
Business Informatics -> Become king of codemonkeys

>>10747463
>Business Informatics
Well, that's more or less CS meets BA.
You will understand both, but master neither.

>>10739413
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>10739457
>applied mathematics
Literally everything can be interpreted as applied mathematics.

>>10747481
I'll master the art of making money

>>10747481
From what I understand it is supposed to be both, you'll learn everything a normal CS course teaches plus BA on top of that. You'll mostly concern yourself with how to apply your CS knowledge in a corporate setting and you can become a manager or consultant or something like that.

>>10747701
>you'll learn everything a normal CS course teaches plus BA on top of that.
In the same time as "a normal CS course"?
Stop being ridiculous. You learn the foundations, and that's it.

You need to excel in discrete math and calculus in order to understand algorithm design and analysis.

What is the difference between CompSci,CompEng and SoftEng?

bamp

>>10748884
Have no first hand CE experience so don't know my dude...
But CS and SE is a hilarious cluster fuck.
People who go to softeng though they where to cool for CS (but in reality just didn't get in or their parents wanted them to be an "engineer") and just want to be a programmer
And CS cucks like me are torn between generally interesting things like discrete math and calculus (including vec calc and usually anything after is an elective if Ur lucky) , and the absolutely mind numbing coding work that persists in some places longer then in others before you get to do interesting projects.
If you are even thinking about going into CS or CE then I suspect you like/are interested in math outside simple number theory and discrete math, so do that (either way you will learn about of programming and math in either one) and chose which one you like the most based on unit outline and shit.

SE is for someone who FUCKING-LOVES tech-culture and programming, so if that's you (no shame) just go do that.
What do you really like in computer related stuff ?
>theory
CS, unless you like hardware aswell then consider CE
>mostly hardware, physics and math
CE without a doubt
>programming
Can't go wrong with CS but it's usually fine to do software engineering if you prefer that syllabus

Just go with what you want to do and look at the University outlines in curriculum for required subjects and going to job sites and searching based on degrees is never a bad idea

>>10748445
To be more precise I would say good number theory is what makes or breaks this, stuff like logical algebra, proofs etc is integral to algorithmic understanding

>>10744728
I mean that doesn't help much since those guys have so many books ; where to start ?
Also everytime you mention one of these guys you always get posts saying to read the other , ad infinitum

>>10751567
>generally interesting things like discrete math and calculus
Those are soft as shit freshman classes
>>theory
>CS, unless you like hardware aswell then consider CE
No, get a math degree then get a graduate degree in CS
>>programming
>Can't go wrong with CS
1. You will never become a good programmer taking classes. You have to teach it to yourself no matter what you major in.
2. You barely learn shit in CS.
3. HR just wants to see a degree, any degree.

You're literally wasting 4 years

>>10743611
Behold the typical CS program

>>10743611
>they have at most 3 courses per semester, or else they'll all be watered down versions.

Courses don't work that way. Professors don't pay attention to how many classes you have and "water them down".

>>10751611
Stop arguing for the sake.
He asked a vague question I'm sure his life doesn't depend on this particular instance.
Plus forcing what people should unequivocally do is just ridiculous, not everyone gives a fuck about math unfortunately and even thinking that CE is comparable is silly at best

>>10751611
>No, get a math degree then get a graduate degree in CS
The fact you have to get a graduate degree in another field should let you know your degree is worthless.

No one looks kindly on a math degree. It's not impressive, it's widely considered to be one of the easiest STEM degrees, and it's unemployable providing no benefits for graduate school over CS.
A math degree won't help you in architecture, OS, compilers etc. It won't even provide an edge in CS theory or machine learning unless you're actually a stats major. There's simply no benefit and a a student who majored in CS will always have an advantage over you. The math you learned mostly related nothing to CS and even if it did you have no understanding of the application because you simply didn't learn it.


Just accept it. I don't know why you are so desperate to justify your degree but that itself tells you how little value your degree holds.
You're literally wasting four years of your life by getting a math degree. If graduate school does not work out you are screwed.
A bachelor's in CS will at least get you a high salary nearing or being at 6 figures.
What will a math degree get you? McDonald's manager.

>>10739397
If you want to do programming there is nothing wrong with a CS degree. But a CE degree opens the same doors and more.
But here's the real redpill - programmers don't need a 4 year degree, especially if you just want to do app/web development.

>>10753348
>No one looks kindly on a math degree. It's not impressive, it's widely considered to be one of the easiest STEM degrees
I've literally never heard this in my life. I did CS and Math and my CS classes required virtually zero studying while I worked my ass off for Math.

Ok, lets dig in.
>no math in compilers
Absolutely wrong. Just, so so wrong. Give the ISL manual a read and then never repeat this statement. http://isl.gforge.inria.fr/manual.pdf

>Math will not provide an edge in CS theory
Perhaps true for top 10 schools but at many schools the CS students can get by with relatively little math - probably just a single course with proofs and a couple calc classes. A major in math with a few CS courses could provide a student much better footing for doing work in theory. I agree that a math degree *may* not help, but if you pick the right courses, it's probably great prep for a MS/PhD in CS Theory, especially if your school doesn't have many CS theory classes for undergrads.

I agree that a BS is Math is not very worthwhile by itself though.

>>10753348
>>10751611
>>10753639
I did a double major in math and CS. I don't know if it's your schools, biases for or against academia (I'm in academia myself), or otherwise, but you're both clearly hyperbolizing the situation. I don't think many CS programs are outright useless, but their rigor is generally lower than math or physics since they tend to focus on industry fundamentals and a practicum. There are obvious exceptions. CS is very employable now but it's also very competitive towards the top. Math isn't completely unemployable, but alone it can't stand to an industry focused degree. That being said..it's literally made for the academic route. So I don't really see the problem here? If you want to do grad school, double majoring only helps you; it really helped me and accelerated me past my peers in either subject because I went ham.

Also
>Math will not provide an edge in CS theory
This is blatantly false though..
I'm not saying majoring in CS is useless or you can't catch up, but traditional math is always welcome and at home in TCS departments. There are lots of math and CS undergrads. Your undergrad degree is in "literally who gives a shit" tier unless your plans are to do industry with nothing but a masters for an extra salary boost. If you wanna do academics, you can major in whatever, and as long as your research credentials, basics, and motivation are there, you're considered as a serious candidate. I know 3 CS former undergrads at my current grad school who do math in grad. This idea of mutual exclusion or that one degree is king is bullshit in the face of research

>>10753700
Oh by the way, when I say rigor of program, I'm referring to an undergrad curriculum. Grad school TCS, physics, math, etc. all make up the mathematical sciences use heavy theory for their chief investigation.

>>10739466
I'm a 30yr boomer going back to school and re-learning the math is difficult at this age. Definitely use this >>10739466

>>10739397
> asking four chan dot org for career advice

true chads do EE, you get a mix of every field, and are hireable in any of them.

>>10754376
It's 4channel you bigot.

>>10754376
>you get a mix of every field
Not exactly. Even if you did, that's just an easy argument as to why EE is a bunch of topics that are watered down for application.
>hireable in any of them
Yeah no. Considering the massive over saturation going on in EE in general, you're not even always hirable as an EE these days anyway.

>>10754376
>>10754642
Also
>EE
>TCS
>Any pure math
Anon, your controls, communication/RF, and learning on sigproc classes aren't "pure math."

>>10753609
>programmers don't need a 4 year degree
Code monkeys need no degree, yeah.
I don't think anyone who has the choice would choose to become a code monkey, though. You will suffer through stupid decisions made a layer or more further up that you can't influence or ignore.
You want to be the guy making the (potentially stupid) decisions. To become that, a degree helps a lot.

>>10740316
>>10742741
Are you two retarded or just incapabe of doing anything under your own power? Literally found it in under 2 minutes on gelbooru with just the tags heart-shaped_pupils, blonde_hair, and open_mouth. Fucking learn to think for yourself.

https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=4725150

>>10753639
>I did CS and Math and my CS classes required virtually zero studying while I worked my ass off for Math.
Post your uni then. Math students are considered future teachers and society doesn't think highly of teachers. It's a major for people who passed the minimum intelligence threshold to be a STEM major but who lacked the dedication to study a more work intensive major. That's at least how many people see it.

>>no math in compilers
When the fuck did I say this? Can you really not argue besides putting words in my mouth? Learn to read.
I said a math degree won't help for compilers. It won't magically make you able to build a compiler, to do that you would need a much deeper understanding of CS.
>Perhaps true for top 10 schools but at many schools the CS students can get by with relatively little math
Stop with this mindless meme. It means nothing. First prove you can get by with little math at the average school. You'll keep dodging this because you know you can't prove squat.
>A major in math with a few CS courses could provide a student much better footing for doing work in theory.
At my uni a minor in CS has students take some core CS classes such as data structures, algorithms, and discrete structures so I agree with this.
What I want you to understand is people largely don't give a shit about TCS. People want to do machine learning, security, architecture, etc. TCS is a tiny minority in the grand scheme of things. Get this through your thick skull already.
I don't care how much you like tcs no one else cares. Stop trying to ruin people's lives by getting them to study a useless four year degree.

>>10753700
First, why do you think industry fundamentals are easy?
Secondly, what do you even mean by industry fundamentals? Which classes are these? Do you think the average CS major takes 10 web design classes or some shit?

>but traditional math is always welcome and at home in TCS departments.
tbf I think my bias is I often associate TCS with graph theory, combinatorics, fields that are closely tied to CS hence why I forget how big of an umbrella it really is.

Still the point I've tried getting people to understand is TCS is a very tiny field in comparison to other graduate CS fields. Most people don't want to do TCS, they want to do networks, machine learning, etc. Hence why a math degree is pointless for the vast majority of future CS students.

I have no fucking clue how this shit thread is still up
MODs please kills it, or it will keep getting a bump every day for ever

>>10739457
Mathematics is just applied CS

>>10755986
And life is just applied BS.

>>10755384
>First, why do you think industry fundamentals are easy?
Because I've done them. Individual work can be hard after a number of years, but the actual difficulty of getting started isn't super high.
>Secondly, what do you even mean by industry fundamentals?
Programming and design principles, data structures,a first dedicated algorithms course, basic architecture and systems, results from numerical analysis, and maybe 1-2 application topics like ML or graphics programming. It's not really the breadth I have a big problem with; if people wanna focus on these topics, that's fine. Interviews can be tense, but actual material is..not super tough, as someone who has passed through 2 big job interviews and lots of internship interviews, both at reputable companies, that getting in (and by extension, what schools focus on since most people go to CS to get the degree and pass interviews), it's not super tough material. The problems range from boring to incredibly interesting, but they're not hard Imo.
>Do you think the average CS major takes 10 web design classes or some shit?
No. I took CS as a double major. I don't think it's as difficult on average if you look at requirements, but if you're in a good program and wanna go ham, there are lots of opportunities to go ham.

Also, in regards to your response to the other guy; dude I've seen you explain that you wanna fight fire with fire, but shitposting out about math majors really isn't convincing anybody either. I like CS and wouldn't have stuck if I didn't think it was truly difficult and interesting in the long run.
>Math students are considered future teachers
By random people not in STEM sure, but everyone and their mother in STEM knows about math academia

>>10756130
No, global warming is applied BS

>>10755348
Continuing: I'm not the guy you responded to
>It's a major for people who passed the minimum intelligence threshold to be a STEM major. That's at least how many people see it.
???
Nobody thinks this. Engineering majors groan the most about classes in the math department. You could say that people think they're nerds, dorks, or what they do is far removed from reality, but for people who lack in aptitude? That's a pretty outlandish statement considering that the majority of people hate "math" due to perceived difficulty. I don't think people see others doing something they hate doing and think, "wow, they must have no higher ambitions."

I don't think just knowing category theoretic notions behind semantics necessarily tells you how to build a standard compiler, but I do think it's a foundation for people who want to go deeper into the subject, especially on the abstract algebraic notions (and it shows up everywhere in CS anyway). It's just a matter of priorities and what it means to "know" a subject.
>I don't care how much you like tcs no one else cares
The reason you're hearing it a lot is because this is /sci/, where people are more interested in academic careers. Even systems and other topics intersect a lot with theory when you're studying in grad school, so it's pretty integral to be well rounded in mathematics. Nobody is giving advice to ruin somebody else's life. Again, math is just another major and it's fine if you wanna do academia. If you wanna do industry first and foremost, then CS is fine for that. However, compared to math and physics, there is more catchup when doing grad school topics if you don't have a math background. That's really all I (dunno if the other guy is saying that too) want to say. It's not a situation that nobody cares, either; there's a problem with competitive spots for tenure and just admission for TCS for a reason. This game of X major is useless, whether it's CS or math, is a stupid game to play.

>>10739457
Eh it's a split between applied and pure. There are a lot of pure topics in CS if you search for more than a second.

>>10756498
>data structures,a first dedicated algorithms course, basic architecture and systems, results from numerical analysis, and maybe 1-2 application topics like ML or graphics programming.
A lot of people find these classes difficult, and no I don't just mean CS majors, other people trying to minor or double major in cs often struggle in these classes. My algorithms class had a couple graduate students who where taking the class as a prereq to enter the CS graduate program. The average of the midterm for the undergrad cs students was about a 45%. For the graduate students it was about a 58%. Keep in mind these where graduate students, as in the top of their class. So its obvious they would do better then the average CS student and even then they struggled. Now I don't know if they where all math majors, they could be physics, math, EE, etc. but the point is they themselves struggled in the class. Hence why I don't understand why you think algorithms is easy. Maybe you're a genius, but the same isn't true for the rest.
ML and computer graphics where considered two of the hardest undergrad CS classes where I went but this might vary from university to university.
>I don't think it's as difficult on average if you look at requirements
Mind posting your university?
Or if not at least say which country you live in or if the US what state you went to?
>dude I've seen you explain that you wanna fight fire with fire, but shitposting out about math majors really isn't convincing anybody either.
When did I say this?
Look bro I'm just telling you the blunt truth. I had never seen math so highly regarded until I came to /sci/
>but everyone and their mother in STEM knows about math academia
Math academia can't even support 1/4 of the people who get a PhD.
I'm sorry but the fact is most people who go into math will never make it in academia, there is a limited number of positions. That's the reality.

>>10756530
>Nobody thinks this.
They do. Math is intelligence based but not really work intensive. At a certain intellectual level you can major in math, the same isn't true for engineering/physics/etc. where the amount of work you can put in is a huge factor in your success. The same applies to CS but since you'll disagree and I don't know where you went I'll avoid listing it for now.
>Engineering majors groan the most about classes in the math department.
Completely false. I have literally never heard this. Never. Math classes are considered the easy classes among the engineer's I've known. For CS we also see them as easy because we don't have to worry about week long projects.
I'm not saying math is easy, it can be and is hard and again its intelligence based. What I'm saying is if I slack off in math I can end up with a C and still be somewhat happy if I slack off in a CS class with a project I'm fucked and failing the class. Hence why math classes allow more leeway whereas CS classes provide no breaks at all. I hit the minimum intelligence threshold where I can understand math so if I don't put in effort I get a C whereas for CS reaching the minimum intelligence threshold won't get me to pass the class if I don't put in the effort. Can you understand now what I'm trying to say?
>The reason you're hearing it a lot is because this is /sci/, where people are more interested in academic careers.
And guess where the majority of academic careers are for CS? I'll give you a hint: its not tcs.

Anyways I see your logic but again OP and most people never mention a preferation for tcs and you guys try and push them there. That's the problem I have.

>>10739413
why would you do this if all you want is a programming job? you barely need a degree as it is