/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12303837
There's too big of a gulf. EE can do actual engineering. CS will maybe learn how to solve basic differential equations.

>>12303837
No. Fuck EE's. "Waah waah waah. Why is this taking so long? It's just a few lines of code."

>>12303842
>>12303843
Same dude inciting a divide

>>12303842
>>12303843
Yes, CS cannot into mathematical modelling and EE cannot into programming.

>>12303837
CS isn't engineering, its more of an intro into how things work with more of a focus on coding. CS is so broad that unless you have lots of experience in a specific field, a BA in CS isn't worth a damn around here.

>>12303843
>>12303856
>EE cannot into programming

I'm an EE with a focus in mechatronics. The level of coding that I do blows away CS grads. Bare metal assembly is a hard idea to grasp for people focusing on high level languages.

>>12303858
>a BA in CS isn't worth a damn
Not worth a damn in what? You could easily get a programming job with a CS BA.

>>12303867
Low level programming is easy. Please tell me what you're writing in assembly.

>>12303867
why not write a compiler and code in c directly you fucking codelet

>>12303842
>EE can do actual engineering
Most EEs end up doing basic fintech and software dev bullshit like a lot of bad CS majors.
The cream of the crop can do each other's work because, well, they're good students whose background is incidental
>>12303856
This isn't exactly true. Lots of CS is about mathematical modelling. Lots of EE is about programming. CS undergrad largely sucks, but CS at large is fine academically
>>12303858
It really depends on your school. At the grad level at any more than decent school, CS is clearly the baby of math and engineering and has little to do with """focusing on coding"""""
>>12303867
>The level of coding that I do blows away CS grads
nobody gives a fuck about your controller code. And while there are a lot of shitty CS majors out there, I've never seen a halfway decent one be impressed or scared by anything low level, mainly since everyone takes the class where you have to build most of the OS from scratch and embedded and graphics processing are popular electives here

The EE defense force is really out here on full fire. CS undergrad is so-so, but do you guys really have no idea what CS actually is?

>>12303867
>assembly
>bare metal
if you aren't doing VLSI or directly working with opcodes, you aren't doing bare metal.
>muh this is impressive to CS grads
literally every CS major, shitty or not, has an architecture class where they write assembly, have to recover high level functions from optimized asm code that isn't obvious, implement instruction sets, do at least the basics of digital logic, etc..

If you're surrounded by people who think this is "hard to grasp" you are literally among idiot freshmen

>>12303907
>literally every CS major, shitty or not, has an architecture class where they write assembly, have to recover high level functions from optimized asm code that isn't obvious, implement instruction sets, do at least the basics of digital logic, etc..
tfw have to design custom processor in verilog because students keep using existing tools to cheat

>>12303934
I know some CE's who took the architecture class at the CS department since it's actually more decent than the EE department's one, which is mostly just codelab for basic RISC projects solvable in an hour + a few circuit algorithms. About 25 / 40 CE's were busted for cheating because they turned in C code that was compiled into asm with the *exact same* optimization flag. They ended up having near identical code, and it wasn't even nearly as simple as just writing out the asm from scratch and linking it to C code to test it out.

>>12303957
It's been a while, so I'm rusty. They need to write some simple assembly code, match a calling convention, and make sure there were external symbols for the functions?, What was the assembly code supposed to do?

>>12303963
you can use extern int, write asm, and link using a makefile.
>what was the assembly code supposed to do
one part asked to compute binomial coefficients and detect overflow. Bonus points for computing coefficients for which n! would clearly if you multiplied it out exactly, while still detecting overflow in the entire coefficient.

The second part was identifying two different short, terse pieces of asm that had been run through the optimization flags a few times. You had to write roughly equivalent code in C. Both ended up being optimized dynamic programming code. The first was memoizing the fibonacci sequence, and the second was unbounded knapsack. The first was easy, and the second was kind of a bitch to see even though the array suggested that there was a partition problem a priori.

>>12303858
Almost every field of computer science is interdisciplinary with other subjects. Machine learning with statistics, human-computer interaction with psychology, computer architecture with EE, data structures and automata theory with discrete mathematics, programming language theory with linguistics, etc.

>>12304117
>programming language theory with linguistics
you're thinking natural language processing with linguistics and statistics. programming language theory is close to subfields of logic and category theory.
There's a lot more math in theoretical CS at large: differential geometry comes up a lot in graphics research, everything from functional analysis (low distortion metrics) in algorithms to measure theory (entanglement in quantum information), etc etc..

in my experience working with people of different backgrounds, CS are a real mixed bag depending on school and specialization. Engineering undergrads are mostly braindead when it comes to anything outside of their immediate area of experience. Engineering grad students are more flexible with moving between different problem domains.

Anyone without extensive programming experience sucks at writing code, no exceptions.

>>12304203
>Engineering grad students are more flexible with moving between different problem domains.
I would say this is the case with many STEM grad students. I see a good amount of CS students in compressed sensing, in optics applications, signals, etc., who I wouldn't have expected to be there, as well as some people like Srivastava, who did a CS PhD, but holds a math position at berkeley. Dude solved the Kadison-Singer problem with his advisor and another mathematician

>>12304203

What's the best way an engineering undergrad can obtain "extensive programming experience" and generally broaden their horizons, on top of their course load? What kind of projects would you recommend?

if i want embedded software engineering, ee or cs major no cpe here?

>>12304700
EE all the way. Embedded requires a good understanding of the architecture you’re working with as well as the peripherals you’re communicating with. The only thing EE might not provide is a good understanding of operating systems which is important when implementing RTOS.

>>12304700
>>12304797
EE and CE are natural routes to embedded, but I see a decent amount of CS guys get into embedded after doing work with / classes in OS design and firmware, and FPGA applications. As the anon suggests, there’s some knowledge you’ll have to catch up on, but knowledge as far as computer systems go is actually fairly trivial catch up provided you teach yourself the basic physics, signals, and dld, none of which are actually that hard.
>good understanding of the architecture
I dunno if this was specific to my school, but the CS computer architecture courses were well known for being really good. Our department has several people whose work on memory virtualization, bus policy, and embedded research has made it into the big mainstream companies for graphics, processor design, etc etc.

So really, it just ends up with “pick your starting point.”

>>12304674
By doing extensive programming. Research is the ticket for most people there.

>>12303837
I'm currently majoring in math and CS so basically I'm btfoing all EE's in this thread.

>>12305042
I did this and took control theory and RF in the EE department since it pertained to some research I was doing in late undergrad (I knew enough sigproc and classic information theory rom self study and use in research).
These subjects are legitimately interesting! But the EEs in these classes were so-so. I remember having a lot of fun talking about modulation, but EE’s struggled with it more than I thought they would...

>>12305091
Lol you took baby control theory and that's all you can brag about, you've not even seen the surface of what it's all about, take some graduate courses and then come back and talk shit. Bachelors ee usually aren't specialized enough, they're usually too overwhelmed with dozens of different units to make sense of what one area is all about. They were probably not even interested in that specialization.

>>12305163
Are you ok bro? We're just joking around, you sound like you're seething.

>>12305163
Both classes were upper division, and RF was crosslisted as intro RF in the grad department. Sorry anon
>muh baby material
I took grad classes in both math and CS, both of which became demonstrably harder than my experience in RF. RF isn’t a walk in the park, and it’s a lot of details, but this doesn’t exactly translate to core difficulty. I do agree that it’s black magic though

>>12305163
>guys guys uhh BSEE holders aren’t that good at this material I like, and they probably didn’t like that part to begin with
>isn’t that what CS people say about their subject and you shitpost anyway
>NO BRO ITS DIFFERENT WHEN ITS ABOUT THE STUFF I LIKE
cry more, brainlet

>>12305204
>muh Graduate CS classes harder than intro rf
I thought you were an undergrad back then, try to be consistent for once.
FYI i wasn't even comparing difficulty, I was bringing attention to how juvenile and amateur your post is regarding comparing your knowledge on ee subjects vs knowledge of actual ee students who understand why they're taught what they learn.

>>12303856
some of the most beautifully written and bugless code i saw was written all by EE coworkers

also most CS students define programming as writing software and consider us bad programmers because we dont do that...but everytime i gave a project to a CS student to write some MCU programme they either didnt understand how to do it because they dont understand their hardware, they did it extremely poorly (again because they dont understand the hardware) and most of the time they were not able to do it because they dont know how to program and have no proper algorithmic approach since they think learning a coding languge is the same as knowing how to programme

>a software developer gave an electronics engineer a project to write a piece of software >after a week the EE finished and gave it to the developer
>the developer went on to test the software
>hey man this is what we needed and i couldnt even find a single bug how did you manage that
>the EE said "i didnt know i was supposed to have bugs in the code "

>ITT: anecdote after anecdote

>>12305238
> thought you were an undergrad back then, try to be consistent for once.
...you didn’t take grad courses at the end of your undergrad? Oh right, EE has a strict ABET sequence of undergrad classes you have to take. Yes, I took several math and CS grad classes in my junior to senior year, and I took one grad EE class.
>my understanding versus theirs
I knew enough to get into the class, and I was good enough to do better in their class and use it for my research on abstract algebra and communication complexity in RF theory. I’m bringing to attention how juvenile it is to think your undergrad curriculum entitles you to “I know more than X” when most EE’s barely know what the fuck goes on in their classes and gets curved to C’s to appear competent.

Come back at me and tell me I don’t know enough EE when you take away my paper in compressed sensing

>>12305239
I mean, ive seen the same out of CS majors, and I’ve seen the cleanest and most clever uses of signals in compression, embedded environments, and image processing research out there as well. Hell, there was that CS lab that did material fabrication research:
http://vcg.isti.cnr.it/Publications/2015/PZMPCZ15/

It’s almost like engineering undergrads like to immediately judge by their misconceptions of the major despite the fact that this is not a consistent way to value people! Especially when most engineers are incredibly shitty students but their departments don’t kick them out unless they get F’s in spite of their massive curves!

>>12305356
well that was kind of my point with >>12305239
most of the people in this thread are either brainlet students (i never met a well graded and hardworking student that bitched about other lectures unless they were extremely coincited) or people that have their degree but never worked in their field properly and are salty at other people that do

what are the math+cs fags planning on even doing with their lives? most people i've met with that combo just chase money

>>12305239
>some of the most beautifully written and bugless code i saw was written all by EE coworkers
could it be hardware vs software mentality? in software we accept bugs as an inevitability and even if they do happen it just means we roll it back until it gets fixed or if it's not that big of a deal we just keep it there

>>12305377
>what are the math+cs fags planning on even doing with their lives? most people i've met with that combo just chase money
Research in real CS or mathematics in CS.
>could it be hardware vs software mentality?
it has to do with the scale of abstraction and a use case. A lot of software systems talk to a lot of other software and hardware systems, and do so through different layers of language, protocol, etc etc.

That, and the software industry at large has low standards for its entry level shit, but as soon as you hit aircraft, cryptosystems, HFT, and HPC, you end up with incredibly good engineering in the code, CS major or otherwise. That, and if you end up doing stuff in passion industries like game engine development, there's a ridiculous amount of good, mathematically charged engineering there between the hardware and software.

>>12303837
That's nothing, you should see the tradies working on the same home. Holes in the walls holes drilled in drain pipes boxes filled with plaster...its a shitshow and they're all paid by the same guy.

>>12305340
Compressed sensing as applied by a CS graduate isn't the same as applied by an engineer, so quit comparing, you are not an expert in ee subjects just as an ee isn't an expert on CS subjects. The way you would implement it isn't the same way an ee would, you just took a common subject applied it in a CS manner and concluded being an expert in ee signal theory, did you build circuits or just write code? Did you apply any other ee theory while at it or just CS?

>>12305400
>Research in real CS or mathematics in CS.
pure anecdotes but i find most people who went for this really ended up just working in finance. maybe they'll change course after they don't need to care about money, but it's hard to argue against dollar value

>but as soon as you hit aircraft, cryptosystems, HFT, and HPC, you end up with incredibly good engineering in the code,
code that has the potential to cause billions of dollars in damages tends to receive a lot more care than other code.
at work my team actually works on mission critical code, but we give less and less of a shit the further we get away from it. none of this stuff was thought through properly and my team has high attrition and people leave within 6-9 months of joining
i've been told by at least 3-4 people on my team to get the fuck out asap, and they all put their money where their mouth is and left as well

>>12304797
CE > CS > EE

>>12303837
>csgo people need to stop hating me
no there can be only one highlander

>>12305450
>Compressed sensing as applied by a CS graduate isn't the same as applied by an engineer, so quit comparing,
>applied
Dude, I studied recovering noisy measurements which come up in all settings, especially the EE side for obvious reasons.
>guys it isn't the same!
Exactly what would the "CS applications" be that are significantly different? This research is on compressed sensing, period, and it gives a method / body of knowledge to the techniques inherent to all parts of engineering that have to do with sensing
>The way you would implement it isn't the same way an ee would
lmao explain this. Do you really think CS research is about writing muh code and coming to a result using stuff inspired from other fields? Don't you know that a lot of the biggest error correcting code research (namely in locally decodable codes), a classic EE topic, came from the CS departments?
>you just took a common subject applied it in a CS manner
I did? News to me. Exactly what is a "CS manner" anyway?
>concluded being an expert in ee signal theory
nah, there are definitely things in signal theory I don't know, but I am incredibly confident that I know signal theory as well as any BSEE engineer and as well as anyone who has taken first year grad signals.
>did you build circuits or just write code?
The building of circuits is mostly done on PSCAD and Cadence these days, markup languages implemented in software. We had a physical demo yes, but electrical ENGINEERING is done before I hit the solder.
>apply any other ee theory while at it or just CS?
What do we qualify as CS vs EE theory here? Communication? Both CS and EE have a storied tradition of studying communication through the transfer of information. CS has a storied tradition of studying randomness extractors while EE has studied recoverable noisy signals. Exactly what's the salient difference between the two here?

Dude, I'm convinced you're early undergrad and actually know nothing you're talking about

>>12305459
> i find most people who went for this really ended up just working in finance.
you can get into fintech more easily than double majoring lmao. Most people who do this combination and go for the honors / grad courses do it because they like the subject.
>i've been told by at least 3-4 people on my team to get the fuck out asap, and they all put their money where their mouth is and left as well
yeah people don't realize how stressful those jobs are. I like working on critical stuff, but I find that the research setting is much more conducive to both results and sleep lmao, at the cost of being way harder to break into

>>12303842
no ee major can build a compiler, ofc we build stuff haha

>>12305496
>yeah people don't realize how stressful those jobs are
job's the opposite of stressful actually since all the critical code is already written. it's stable and besides some issues like hardware incompatibility or performance issues nobody ever touches that code.
that stuff is put on a pedastal, everything else is half assed garbage written by new grads who leave the team within 6 months with zero oversight

>>12305487
Dude I wasn't disputing your basic knowledge, I was against comparisons with graduates. If you read my original post, I told you to take more graduate courses instead of boasting of beating undergrads at basic ee theory. Lol there's a tonne of ways an ee would apply compressed sensing that a CS might not have a clue to, such as improved estimation when collecting data for control which leads to faster control on limited memory devices, or how to build an adc that successfully filters signals with large bandwidths by noting that it's not necessary that the sampling rate be twice the nyquist rate for a sparsely represented signal as assumed in classical adcs. A CS might be interested in the computational complexities involved with implementing compressed sensing algorithms, but what do I know?

All issues from the level of logic gates have nothing to do with electrical engineering. Logic gates were initially implemented as mechanical systems, and nowadays computations can even be performed in proteins. Signal processing, like sound and image processing, is information processing - core of informatics.

From the informatic perspective:
Computer engineering: computers are machines which process information so design of computer systems its field of informatics.
Telecomunications deal with the transfer of information so its next field of informatics.
Cognitive science - study of process information in brains so its next field of informatics.
Computer science - is literally informatics of artificial. If natural & neural computing is within computer science, then informatics is literally computer science.

Electrical aspects related to computers is only how logic computer architecture can be realised psychicaly. From an informatic point of view, the information carrier - electrons, proteins or brain synapses - is irrelevant.

>>12305556
> I told you to take more graduate courses instead of boasting of beating undergrads at basic ee theory.
Fair, but I'm contesting here that I don't think EE theory is significantly harder than any other STEM theory out there.
>Lol there's a tonne of ways an ee would apply compressed sensing that a CS might not have a clue to
This is a vacuous statement. "May not know" goes both ways, but exactly what stops CS people from not having any motivation to do compressed sensing? The big reason why CS and compressed sensing literature have intersected is because CS people came in studying sketching algorithms talking about how high dimensional data can be efficiently and effectively recovered from low dimensional, low distortion metric representations.
>the various use cases
Some of these come from use cases that CS traditionally study, such as memory control and filters, but what baffles me usually comes down to this weird "cut and dry" classification of EE vs CS. A lot of the topics you mentioned have systems CS researchers in signals and communication working on them - exactly why wouldn't they care about this? That's what baffling me, like somehow it has to be about code or else the CS researcher doesn't care about it.
>A CS might be interested in the computational complexities involved with implementing compressed sensing algorithms, but what do I know?
partially, but most of what CS is actually interested is in compressed sensing, period. It's an interesting problem that has both physical and non physical applications. On the ML side, distortion embedding is very important for making learning tenable, but recovering approximately sparse signals is something *everyone* cares about generally.

And it's weird to harp on compressed sensing as EE core, especially when it got very popular in mid 2000s as the intersection of applied math, CS, and EE departments. When you're in research, period, titles literally nothing - you study what is interesting

>>12305556
>A CS might be interested in the computational complexities involved with implementing compressed sensing algorithms, but what do I know?
lmao you're harping on the other poster for being condescending, but this is just ignorant. Engineering students really don't know what CS people study or why

>>12305549
It really depends. If you're working in banking or aircraft code for someone like boeing, then yeah you don't touch the COBOL / fortran that does the mission critical code, but that needs to be done largely from scratch in many other contexts.

>>12305602
Your response does not refute anything I said, provide a counter point, if you say I don't know it's upon you to either show me how or just ignore. You also can't prove whether i'm the original poster you replied to, so now you are annoyed that you were wrong about it and can't hide it!

>>12305607
yeah i'm just speaking from personal experience
we have the holy code that is never touched. a 1 line config change had to be done because performance was degraded on new hardware and it took a month and a half.
lot of the seniors have commented how little respect we give some of the "lesser" stuff.
t. have root access to production for some systems

First programable computer was designed and engineered by Kondrad Zuse, the german Informatician. He created also first high-level programming language, first computer program and did significiant contributions to automata theory including cellular autoamta and concept of calculating space / computing space. Europeans designed first computers, made most research in neural networks, in nautal computing.

Its 2020. Why american retards still do not introduce term informatics at universities and politechnics for unite computational-related sciences?

>>12305616
>Your response does not refute anything I said
There's a post that does lmao, why would I repeat what that already says?
>so now you are annoyed that you were wrong about it and can't hide it!
?????
I'm not annoyed. I'm amused that yet again, an EE student is willing to give their field the benefit of the doubt for being wide but CS gets shafted to being about code and about calculating runtimes

>>12305599
Nobody said anything about CS being harder, that's you who introduced it and I've repeated this. We are basically arguing about you boasting basic knowledge when there's more advanced stuff to learn, especially comparing yourself with bachelor's people who know little to nothing. All the other stuff was introduced by you.

>>12305639
You introduced compressed sensing, I didn't, I merely replied to the way an ee can apply it because it overlaps with signal processing. And I did that to show that you can't boast that you know signal processing the way graduate EEs know it.

>>12305650
>>12305556
Do you think the only way to learn higher level CS or EE topics is through academia?

>>12305646
>Nobody said anything about CS being harder, that's you who introduced it and I've repeated this.
I said that my intro grad math and CS courses were harder than my intro grad EE course in RF, and that I had gotten the impression that EE in general was not nearly as difficult or more difficult than most other STEM majors people claim it is.
>We are basically arguing about you boasting basic knowledge when there's more advanced stuff to learn
No, we started arguing over the domains of fields. You started introducing "well uh a CS does this a EE does that, you only used your stuff in a CS way" which you know is bullshit - research is research
>We are basically arguing about you boasting basic knowledge when there's more advanced stuff to learn
dude, I was comparing myself as an UNDERGRAD to their UNDERGRADS and EARLY GRADS. How fucking hard is it to realize that there are many undergrads who take grad courses out there?
> All the other stuff was introduced by you.
Literally false
>>12305650
I'm not the other guy you're replying to.

>>12305662
Not him, but what are we qualifying as higher level CS or EE? Most of the time, it's the most efficient way to learn and the quickest way to break into state of the art research. CS in particular has academia that is way harder / more involved than its industry counterpart, especially since most of CS is agnostic to the software world at large.

>>12305662
>>12305663
this debate is literally retarded if I've been arguing with two people all this while, why can't 4chan just assign a single number for one person in one thread. Now i feel cheated.

>>12305666
>Not him, but what are we qualifying as higher level CS or EE?
Anything you wouldn't learn in an undergraduate program.

>Most of the time, it's the most efficient way to learn and the quickest way to break into state of the art research.
I don't see why that would be the case. Industry professionals need to survey papers and textbooks to solve immediate problems without time to follow an extensive curriculum. Interdisciplinary work is extremely fruitful, but it isn't practical to go to graduate school for multiple programs.

>>12305690
>Industry professionals need to survey papers and textbooks to solve immediate problems without time to follow an extensive curriculum
They would, if the problems prompted the to do so. In industries related to cryposystems, this is true, but a lot of software out there is menial work that doesn't require much but specific knowledge you get on the job. This is why everyone looks down on it, even though it's more like all the good software jobs are taken by the ones who care about the material.
> it isn't practical to go to graduate school for multiple programs.
graduate school is incredibly receptive to interdisciplinary research. People learn what's out of their field all the time - you get a PhD in the side you are most *immediately* interested in. I know CS PhD's who got math appointments and vice versa. CS has rapidly advanced in the last 30 years

So basically the reason for these weird relationships between cs and ee is that electrical engineering academic programs have become literally computer science programs with about 20% more electronics lessons and 20% less algorithms.

Originally, even the Computer Engineering major had 0 courses related to algorithms & programming, entirely was devoted to the construction of computer hardware. This hardware construction was defined as something between computer science and electrical engineering (CS' computer architecture + EE' electrical implementation).
Electrical engineering, on the other hand, was originally about power grids, electric drives, electrical machines like transformators,, circuit theory (resistors, kirchoff laws etc). Even electronics (transistors, oams) were treated as something separate from EE.

In my opinion, Electronics and EE were unnecessarily separated.
However logic circuits are 100% explained by theoretical computer science, not by the electical analysis of circuits, so they belong to computer science, especially logic circuits was orginaly mechanical.

>>12305705
Literally 80% of today computer scientists has background in mathematics, electrical engineering or physics, because CS is absolutly new kind of science in compared to fields like biology, chemistry etc.
In my country this field was named cybernetics in the 50'. In early 60' this field was splited to 2 scietific communities - "mathematical machines" and "information processing" (because of the embarrassment of engaging in politics). Since 1968 those communities merged again under "informatics". Today, due to the fact that English is the language of science and we have to translate everything, we identify ourselves with computer science. Today, after 70 years, we are still scattered among the departments of mathematics, electrical engineering and others, even within one university. For years, we have been striving to be the 4th paradigm of science - after physical, biological and social sciences. Any other sciences study matter and energy. We are the first to study information that should be seen as something equally elementary.

>>12303837
Yet if you compare the EE classes and CS classes, are they comparable? I'm assuming OP is CS trying to fit in with the rest

Linus fuckin Torvalds graduated from CS. Pay some fuckin respect

Can't argue with that

>>12305870
>Yet if you compare the EE classes and CS classes, are they comparable?
Seeing as how both EE and CS blow the difficulty of their coursework out of proportion and rely on the prestige of physics and math respectively to sell their own status, I'd say they're almost exactly comparable.
Learning the circuit tricks to compute out more complicated resistances is not enough to save you from being a shockmonkey. Learning how to analyze elementary recurrences is not enough to save you from being a codemonkey

You are both monkeys, by in large.

this shitty fucking EE vs CS thread has twice the replies of the mathematical CS thread. Guess all /sci/ can do is shitpost.

>>12305496
>I find that the research setting is much more conducive to both results and sleep lmao, a
unfortunately i've become pigeonholed into devops which is the least enjoyable subset of CS

>>12305286

>>12303907
>literally every CS major, shitty or not, has an architecture class...
And them they think they can tackle real world problems.
'cuz I did like a project in school
God, I hate that when dealing with the rookie engineers. Believe me, classwork vs real projects (where profit, lives, etc are at stake) is a world apart. You need to get a few real-world projects under your belt before you should be allowed to say "oh yeah, I know how to do that'

It's not about your post. It just reminded me of the idiots I've worked with.
t. EE/CS embedded (R&D)

>>12305961
>shockmonkey

CSlets' new favorite word lmao, we'll see if it catches on.

>>12306956
I'm curious what your opinion is of the opposite problem with junior engineers: engineers who have dipped their toes in some real-world projects but have no theoretical backing to rely on, and say "oh yeah, I know how to do that".

I run into quite a bit of that in my own line of work.
t. algorithm R&D, ME/EE background

>>12306956
I agree that rookie engineers are annoying, and undergrad is too sanitized to teach people how to do real work in the real world.
>>12307171
I'm not the guy you replied to, but I found that they usually get interested enough in the theory if at first because of its applications, and if they don't, there are usually serious limitations of the scope of their work. But in general, it's so much easier to teach with someone motivated to do the work than it is to work with someone who isn't motivated but knows the material.

>>12306994
>dragging both EE, CS majors
>the obvious EE has no response other than "heh, CSlets"
you are dumb and are surrounded by dumb people in your major.
Electrical engineering is good, but EE majors do not deserve electrical engineering LMAO, in the same way that CS majors really don't deserve computer science

>>12303837
CS is not EE or CE

>>12308009
OP doesn't say they are.

>>12308009
EE and CE are closer together, but treating CS and EE/CE like they're agnostic of each other is a big mistake. They're distinct fields and not mutually intelligible all the time, but there is both a historic and academic connection between them in many areas.

>>12305450
>Compressed sensing as applied by a CS graduate isn't the same as applied by an engineer
are you high.
you legitimately sound salty because someone outside your major can do your work. applied math people also study compressed sensing for the same reasons you do.
nobody gives a shit about your undergrad - learn the material, do the work.

>>12303856
depends on what you mean by mathematical modeling. CS is fine enough background to start learning how to model/solve many classes of optimization problems, at least as good if not better than engineering for some subfields.

>>12303837
i'm undergrad in ME already and staying in school to get EE with a minor in CS,
I like robots