/sci/ - Science & Math

It is useless and most people have no idea what Computer Science is.

it's one of the most desirable degree available today. the only people who think it's bad are 4chan retards

>>5981294
> [Citation needed]

The part about 4chan users being retards.

Not enough math courses.

>having your job outsourced to India

That's why

>>5981298
>>5981294

Yeah, I wouldn't say retarded. 4chan is more like a gathering for capricious sociopaths.

>>5981304
You're mixing software engineering and CS.

>>5981308
So do most CS degree programs, nowadays.

>>5981304
>programming in Java
>any year

roughly the standard at all major universities is:

>1st year
Bullshit java/OO coding class
Bullshit data structures class
Piss easy calculus classes
Piss easy matrix algebra class

>2nd year
Watered down "computer architecture" class
Bullshit software engineering class
Pathetic discrete "math" class
Watered down "probability" class
Crash course on formal languages and automata

>3rd year
Pathetic algorithms course
Watered down computability and complexity theory course
Laughable networks course
Laughable database course
Crash course on various programing languages

>4th year
Laughable computer security course
[if you're lucky] an Operating Systems class
[if you're lucky] a Compilers class

and all the bullshit easy electives you want

No where near the difficulty, breadth, and depth of other real majors.

>>5981319

I'll take my fake major all the way to the bank

>>5981319
copy pasta

>>5981283
>justifiably explain to me why study for a degree in Computer Science is bad

Been discussed to death, search the archives
https://archive.installgentoo.net/cgi-board.pl/sci/thread/5650285
https://archive.installgentoo.net/cgi-board.pl/sci/thread/S5662924
https://archive.installgentoo.net/cgi-board.pl/sci/thread/5665742
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S5700995

I studied CS at a european university and it is a fucking joke. I was literally able to get straight A's in every course solely by skimming through the lecturers' power point presentations one day before the exam. A degree in CS alone does not give you any kind of qualifications whatsoever.

The java programming, babby's first database, the sloppy intro to hardware and the basics of network security are ridiculous and any high schooler who spent a few weekends with the stuff will be more knowledgable in these topics.

The math and theoretical CS are even more laughable. The only people who complain about their hardness are those stereotypical video game retards who already failed their math classes in high school. All the "muh logical quantifiers", "let's mindlessly apply this symbolic manipulation algorithm", "oh wow, an automaton represents a language" or "holy shit, how do I show this algorithm does what it does" babby crap is shallow and hardly deserves to be called university level. A mathematician or a physicsist who is trained in reading definitions, theorems and proofs can pick up all of a BSc computer scientist's theoretical CS much more indepth by spending one or two afternoons of reading a book.

In addition the entire programme is bloated with unnecessary "project mangament", "how do I present UML diagrams to my boss" and similarly idiotic "software engineering" business monkey bullshit.

The worst thing however are the people going for such a degree. Out of all degrees CS seems to attract the most anti-intellectual scum. I seriously wonder how these people even managed to enter university. Every retard who barely passed high school and spends most of his day playing video games seems to think the must study CS. There are socially inept neckbeards of the retarded variety, hating and repeatedly failing math as well as the most simple programming assignments. There are dumbasses whose high school diploma was too bad to go for an economics degree, hence why they want to enter the business monkey route of CS in the hope of getting a little more than minimum salary. Those are of such subhuman IQ that they do not even understand the semantics of an implication in propositional logic.

I'm glad I left CS for something more intellectually challenging.

>>5981319
Well, give the standard of a real major then.

>>5981331
>>5981333
Would I be better off as a pure math major taking a few classes like mathematical modelling and numerical methods? The interesting parts of CS (cryptography) seem heavily mathematical anyway.

>>5981337
>>5981338
you guys are talking to copypasta spam

>>5981338
If you consider yourself mathematically inclined, a maths degree is definitely the better choice. You can take a few CS classes as minor or extracurriculars or you can learn the CS stuff on your own. For a mathematically intelligent person the atmosphere in undergrad CS might even be harmful.

>>5981343
I just wrote these posts on my own. Don't believe me? Then show me where they have ever been posted before.

>>5981343
>every post longer than two sentences must be copypasta
>tl;dr

Your stereotypical anti-intellecutalism is showing.

>>5981349
>>5981346
i know i've read them before. that's all i'm saying

>>5981338
if you want to do really well you may be able to undergrad math and get a master's in CS

How does geology stand against CS when comparing to the rest of STEM?

>>5981353
No, you didn't. You cannot have read the exact same posts because I know I just typed them today for the first time. What you possibly mean is that you read the arguments before. That's possible because I shared my experiences in a different wording in earlier threads some weeks ago. That doesn't make it copypasta, you fucking newfag.

>>5981349

Hey, I've only posted >>5981283 and >>5981306. I'm reading every post here in their entirety.

>>5981331
>>5981333

This.

The problem is that those same "anti-intellectual scum" CS majors then proclaim to be just as good as Physics, Math, and Engineering majors and claim that those field wouldn't even be possible without their vital contributions. When you claim their field is pathetic in comparison, they instantly deflect with the usual "Well at a bad school that just teaches SE/code monkeying maybe, at top schools CS is god tier and practically math!" without justifying what schools are top tier and how they're different/worthwhile. Hence you always see people proclaiming CS is the best major around when it's far from the truth. There are lots of CS jobs out there but they easily can be gotten with a Physics/Math/Eng degree or even just a good portfolio with a HS degree.

A CS BS degree is simply one of the biggest waste of time there is.

>>5981359
Don't know, but your tripcode and your retarded name are hurting my eyes

>>5981364
What about a CS master's degree then ?

>>5981359
You're either in petrochem, and you're heading for 150K starting for an oil company, or you're not, and I hope you can find a research position.

Not science or math.

>>5981364
I think the fundamental problem with CS is that it was never supposed to be a degree on its own. All the founding fathers of CS were mathematicians or physicists. CS should have stayed there, as a subfield of maths and physics. Making it a degree on its own was a mistake. Someone with CS degree is simply lacking the knowledge in either field to contribute.

>>5981338

I wouldn't recommend taking too many applied math courses but a numerical analysis class would be good.

>>5981338
>>5981374
In most math programmes numerical analysis is an obligatory course.

>>5981360
People just have said very similar things along the same line lines before.

Crap programming "skills", "theory" watered down to the point of triviality, and an ocean of retards is the most common complaint of undergrad CS. N

>>5981359

>>5981382
The biggest issue is the ocean of retards. Every cs class I've taken could go, at a minumum, twice the pace if the mouthbreathers were kicked out.

Every CS major I've come across just wants a cushy 9-5 codemonkey job at facebook, Microsoft or Google.

Most tech entrepreneurs from my school graduated with a degree in electrical or computer engineering. CS students just don't have any passion for their subject. They only ever ask questions to clarify simple concepts, never to learn more about the subject.

>>5981373

I agree. Most of undergrad CS should be thrown away with Formal Languages/Complexity Theory/Computability Theory moved into universities' math department and Algorithms/OS/Compilers moved into their CompE/EE departments. There's not enough time to cover enough material to make it worthwhile in it's own right; the best program for CS is MIT's which really just a ComE degree with the best theory courses thrown in.

>>5981409
Most math departments have their own classes in Complexity Theory and Computability Theory. They are much faster and go deeper than their CS versions.

Because it belongs in /g/

>>5981425
/g/ hates cs too

>>5981319

>1st year
Very easy intro to coding
calc 1
lin algebra
discrete math

Java/oo
data structure
assembly
automata
calc 2

>2nd year
intro to SE
compilers
DBA/D
probability ( we had to take the course that actuaries had to take with 60% failure rate)
calc 3
alg analysis
logic gates( down to the very metal)

>3rd year
calc 4
lin algebra 2
SE 2
OS
a form of group project/research paper
a shit ton of electives based on where you want go with your concentration.
What you decided to concentrate in dictates what you will take

>>5982176
>logic gates( down to the very metal)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>5982187
and that's how you know you're on 4chan, unfo...

>>5981331
>>5981333
It sounds like you got a bad CS program.

>get straight A's in every course solely by skimming through the lecturers' power point presentations one day before the exam
You had it easy then. We have a lot of labs and projects where it doesn't matter how bright you are, they WILL consume your free time.

>A degree in CS alone does not give you any kind of qualifications whatsoever.
Yet it's one of the most employable majors.

>The java programming, babby's first database, the sloppy intro to hardware and the basics of network security are ridiculous
That sounds more characteristic of IT than CS. I don't have classes like that.

>The math and theoretical CS are even more laughable... babby crap is shallow and hardly deserves to be called university level
The math is the same as what everyone else takes. It's 3 levels of calc, discrete math, probability/stats, and maybe linear algebra and multivar calc. And the CS Theory isn't difficult, but so what? How does this make us stupid?

Is it unreasonable to not want to waste time on advanced mathematics irrelevant to your interests? There is a wealth of knowledge to be explored related to computing and that's what we want to spend our time on. That you shun the math for being elementary says little about CS students' intelligence, and much about your elitism.

>the entire programme is bloated with unnecessary "project mangament"
Granted. The SE course I took was garbage.

>The worst thing however are the people... anti-intellectual scum... playing video games... socially inept neckbeards... failing math... business monkey route of CS... subhuman IQ....
>hating anyone this much that isn't your wife
kk stay classy

>>5981333
>something more intellectually challenging

What did you pick?

>>5981364
>The problem is that those same "anti-intellectual scum" CS majors then proclaim to be just as good as Physics, Math, and Engineering majors.
>When you claim their field is pathetic in comparison, they instantly deflect with the usual "Well at a bad school that just teaches SE/code monkeying maybe, at top schools CS is god tier and practically math!" without justifying what schools are top tier and how they're different/worthwhile
You're arguing strawman, nobody thinks that. In reality few CS majors believe they do as much math as a math/phys/engineering student, and it doesn't matter because they lack the religious belief that mathematics is holy. We sit around all day manipulating symbols too, just to a practical end. The meaning of CS has been bastardized, but it's still a respectable major.

>>5982340
>It sounds like you got a bad CS program.
See >>5981364 <span class="math"> [/spoiler]>they instantly deflect with the usual "Well at a bad school that just teaches SE maybe"

>it doesn't matter how bright you are, they WILL consume your free time

"It was hard for me so it must of been rigorous and difficult for everyone"

>Yet it's one of the most employable majors.

Look up fizz buzz; have you ever heard of "199 out of 200 civil engineers have no idea how to calculate the load on any structures at all" or "199 out of 200 of math majors can't do any basic arithmetic at all"? You can't attribute that sheer amount to just to a handful of bad schools and claim that your mythical good school is an exception. If you don't know the utter basics of a subject, then claiming advance knowledge based upon it is highly suspect.

Just because Human Resources thinks there are skills to be gained in CS doesn't make it true. The fact is most University don't design their programs in a vacuum; they base their syllabi on other schools courses and choose from the same small pool of textbooks for their courses which ends up making them all mostly homogenize. This is why you'll often hear that is doesn't really mater what school you go to for undergrad. If big name school's CS programs aren't very good, then that strongly implies that lesser known ones aren't shining exceptions to that rule.

>That sounds more characteristic of IT than CS. I don't have classes like that.

Java and Python are fairly standard in most programs.

>And the CS Theory isn't difficult, but so what? How does this make us stupid? Is it unreasonable to not want to waste time on advanced mathematics irrelevant to your interests

So you rather just have coding degree? Then why go to an University and not a trade school? To do any real work in CS requires far more than what is typically taught in "discrete math". If you spend 4 years to supposedly study a subject and get nowhere then yes, that's pretty stupid of you.

>>5982514
>See >>5981364 >they instantly deflect with the usual "Well at a bad school that just teaches SE maybe"
But... the school matters. There's a lot of variation between them.

What? Our discussion has nothing to do with that post. It criticizes those who pretend mathematically rigorous undergrad CS programs are common. I don't pretend that is the case. I mean to convince you that more mathematical rigor is unnecessary. That the quality of your education is not defined by how much math you take.

>"It was hard for me so it must of been rigorous and difficult for everyone"
My point is much less extreme than that. I am just saying I don't know anyone at my school who would describe CS as "skim lecture notes, get easy A". CS classes are time consuming and considered challenging.

>199 of 200
You're taking a number out of context that was made up on the spot to begin with. It comes from.
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/01/27.html
The author explains that when you're HIRING 199/200 programmers are going to be bad (they are unemployed for a reason). He never states that programmers in general are incompetent. And most of all he doesn't claim CS students are incompetent, in fact he praises them.
>By the way, it's because of this phenomenon—the fact that many of the great people are never on the job market—that we are so aggressive about hiring summer interns. This may be the last time these kids ever show up on the open market. In fact we hunt down the smart CS students and individually beg them to apply for an internship with us, because if you wait around to see who sends you a resume, you're already missing out.

As for fizz buzz: the word on the street is most comp sci graduates can't complete it in a couple of minutes. Which is unsettling if true, but I honestly don't put much weight on these numbers.

I have plenty of real life contacts who give me a better idea of what the software world is like than exaggerated blog posts.

>>5982514

I'm curious, what amount of discrete math would be needed to do real work in the field? I'm learning from Discrete Mathematics with Applications from Susanna S. Epp. It covers; propositional and predicate logic, number theory and proofs, sequences induction and recursion, set theory, functions and relations, probability, graphs & trees, analysis of algorithms and regular expressions and finite state automata.

It's an introductory book so it won't cover everything in intense detail, but I feel like it's a good grounding in the foundations. Obviously discrete math isn't all I would need, but if I only learn discrete math from this book (the math module at university was extremely basic logic and set theory so I need to get it from here) how well would I be covered?

>>5982340
>It sounds like you got a bad CS program.
I talked to many people from other universities and they told me their CS programmes are equally shitty.

>We have a lot of labs and projects where it doesn't matter how bright you are, they WILL consume your free time.
And how does that make it better? If anything, you just demonstrated that your programme is more like a trade and less of university level studies.

>Yet it's one of the most employable majors.
With a CS degree alone without further qualifications you are factually unemployable. Neither the primitive GUI design in java nor the shallow hardware, database or network intro will qualify you for a job. The only people getting acceptable jobs with a CS degree are those who either combined it with another degree or who already had a job before because they self-learned important skills. Quite a few CS students openly told me they are only getting the degree just to have something on paper to force their boss to give them higher salary. The job they already had because they started web design / programming / security in high school. Having demonstrable experience in those is more important to an employer than what you learned in CS. The business monkey variety of retards is even more unemployable. Representatives of local industries explicitly said the degree is trash because these people know neither economics/business nor computing.

>>5982340
>>5982685
>That sounds more characteristic of IT than CS. I don't have classes like that.
Those are typical classes in any BSc programme on CS. Pretty much the same at any university internationally. Please link to your programme.

>The math is the same as what everyone else takes. It's 3 levels of calc, discrete math, probability/stats, and maybe linear algebra and multivar calc. And the CS Theory isn't difficult, but so what? How does this make us stupid?
It is a bare minimum of math and theory, nothing more. A CS graduate will not advance the theory behind CS because that requires math from almost all fields. Theoretical CS is deeply routed in the math department and not accessible with only a CS degree.

>Is it unreasonable to not want to waste time on advanced mathematics irrelevant to your interests?
See the comment above.

>That you shun the math for being elementary says little about CS students' intelligence, and much about your elitism.
If the majority of CS students fails the simplest math classes, i.e. barely more than revision of high school contents, then it definitely says something about their average intelligence.

>>5982514
Not the poster you replied to.

>"It was hard for me so it must of been rigorous and difficult for everyone"

I think you're mixing up "time-consuming" and "difficult". The poster you replied to clearly mentioned time consumption and didn't mention rigor or difficulty.

Difficult things can be time-consuming, but not all time-consuming things are difficult.

>fizz buzz

Maybe it's just my school's program (inb4 all programs are equal), but I've had seniors come by and help me conceptually understand all the things the author claims programmers can't do. In fact, they've even shown me fairly elegant and clever solutions when I've asked for help on things like recursion, for example. For us, each CS class builds off other ones, and the prerequisite requirement is very strict and inherently enforced by the implementation of previous knowledge.

In fact, our school doesn't even use textbooks (barring free ones professors have made in the past) for the starting classes (~2-3 semesters worth), so your point of homogenized classes doesn't even make sense.

If you want, I can show you the course requirements for a CS degree at my school. Maybe it is a joke everywhere else; this is my only exposure to a CS program.

>Real work in CS needs more than the undergraduate level of math they teach you

But isn't that true for a lot of majors? I can't expect to do real work in physics with just my undergraduate degree, and I can't expect to do any real work in mathematics with just an undergraduate degree.

I am defining "real work" as being groundbreaking work, trying to discover new things that are significant.

>>5981283
>that image
Actually I find that there's a substantial amount of girls in my CS classes. It might be that I'm taking the 200 level classes and haven't gotten into "real CS"

Thoughts on Math and CS double major?

The reason CS majors get paid well despite graduating from an incredibly lax program is that programming is the shittiest possible thing you can do with your time and employers have to pay them enough that they don't hang themselves and delay projects further.

>>5981283
I got on the bait YOU ARE REALLY GOOD AT MATHS RIGHT AND YOU LIKE COMPUTERZ GO CS right after high school.

Worst mistake of my life, wasted 3 years studying boring shit with watered down math.At the first year when I asked one of my professors how important is math to CS he told me "Well its really used at all, we just teach it to make you kids think better" that was the second I had to quit but I was too pussy to do it back then.

I quit that shit after 3 years of studying and now I'm going into physics knowing that I won't waste my potential on bullshit degree.

>>5982756
>"Well *isn't* really used at all,

>>5982756
>Physics
>Not a waste of time

Enjoy your nojobs.

self hating physics student

>implying anything in life is not directly caused by having Chad Thundercock Status, which is randomly distributed at birth.
>implying education has any bearing on job (e.g. Snowden)

>>5982756
Are you worried about the lack of jobs in Physics? Or any science, really.

It seems only engineers get careers.

>>5982776
>expecting to get hired when you have passed between the drops and have no actual knowledge

Ye boy thats not CS or SE where you can become codemonkey or sysadmin with just your degree.

>>5982782
I plan to study for PhD and work on actual physics, not leaving the uni and seeking some not related to physics jobs.

>>5982792
Yes, that's the problem though. There are a lot more Physics PhDs than there are jobs.

You haven't even read into this massive job problem, have you?

>>5982803
I'm special snowflake.

>>5982756
i was thinking to start physics the next year and do both at the same time, i'm junior in CS and it's easy as fuck.

>>5982709
>But isn't that true for a lot of majors? I can't expect to do real work in physics with just my undergraduate degree, and I can't expect to do any real work in mathematics with just an undergraduate degree.

But undergrad Math and Physics prepares you for graduate study and there are occasionally undergrads that publish papers in their field. Similarly Engineering prepares you for industry.

CS prepares you for neither and is quite low in any redeeming value.

>>5982756
Math is used a lot actually, just not in all areas. Your teacher sucked.
So you couldn't finish CS in 6 years and quit it because you don't want to waste your potential?

>>5982967
I said 3 years twice, never said anything about 6 years.
And no this degree is easy and mostly BORING, thats the main problem.
I don't think anyone that finds joy in mathematics can like CS.

>>5981283
I am 4th year at CS. If I could choose again, I wouldn't go at university at all, I'd just read a few CS books, and practice a lot.
Most CS related jobs are too specific and can be learned with a simple course. Taking a CS degree at university is like taking a bunch of courses you won't ever need, by teachers who know less than you in what matters of the course, but take it heavy on some shit you'll never need because that's all they know.
It's not hard to pass it, it's just aggravating.
If you want to do CS related work take a few courses. If you want a degree, take something else.

>>5982176
Actuarial science majors at my school tend to be borderline retarded.
>How to divide by fractions?

>>5982803

That's why I'm thinking about switching out of Physics into something that will actually get me a job.

Even though I enjoy the subject, I don't find it appealing, to continue being a poorfag on top ramen every night for another half a decade (or more) to get a PhD, and then if I'm lucky enough to stumble into a research job, only make as much as a CS BA/BS fresh out of school.

>>5982967
>Math is used a lot actually

Using notations and definitions doesn't count as math.

>>5983251
Would have Feynman said something like that ?

Obviously you are not fit for the mustard race.
Go become a normal pleb that works in a cubical just for more money.

>>5983312
Feynman ain't got shit on Schrodinger.

>>5982678

Anyone?

>>5982678
>>5983370
>what amount of discrete math would be needed to do real work in the field?

Tell us what you mean by "real work in the field". If you want to be a code monkey, you'll need close to no math. If you want to solve P=NP, you'll need almost all of math.

>>5983251
Doesn't your country pay you to study ? What kind of shithole do you live in ?

>>5982678
>but I feel like it's a good grounding in the foundations

That is completely wrong. Discrete math is far from being a good introduction to any advance mathematics.

>>5983251
If you care that much about the market value of your degree, switch to geophysics.

>>5983312
Feynman existed in a time where science was actually funded.

UML is more casual than circuitry, no matter how much your teachers tell you otherwise.
Little amount of calculus.
Heck, some even include accounting and shit like that.

>>5982514
>See >>5981364 >they instantly deflect with the usual "Well at a bad school that just teaches SE maybe"
But the school matters. I'll discuss why I don't think they're homogenous in part 2.

>"It was hard for me so it must of been rigorous and difficult for everyone"
I mean it is time consuming. Your experience of getting As by "skimming through lecture notes" is not usually possible because you have to put a lot of time into labs and projects.

>199 of 200
You're taking a number out of context that was made up on the spot to begin with. It comes from.
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/01/27.html
The author explains that when you're HIRING programmers 199/200 are going to be bad. The reason is that you're picking from the rejects. He never claims CS students are incompetent, in fact he praises them.
>By the way, it's because of this phenomenon—the fact that many of the great people are never on the job market—that we are so aggressive about hiring summer interns. This may be the last time these kids ever show up on the open market. In fact we hunt down the smart CS students and individually beg them to apply for an internship with us, because if you wait around to see who sends you a resume, you're already missing out.
There is no reason to be upset.

As for fizz buzz: I have heard that comp sci graduates can't complete it in a couple of minutes. That is unsettling if true but I don't put much weight on these numbers.

Real life contacts give me a better idea of what the software world is like than exaggerated blog posts. Of my two friends who recently graduated from my school one is making 50k at a small company, the other is making 120k at Facebook. I'll probably lie somewhere between, the average starting is ~64k iirc.

I don't see any real evidence for your idea that CS majors are unemployable.

>CS programs are homogenous
It seems less homogenous than most majors. Some schools are more rigorous than the one I go to and others are less. For example one of the colleges I toured had math requirements of only 1 calc and 1 disc math class. Its curriculum included classes like web design and networking which at my school would be considered closer to IT. Also schools structure their curriculum differently. Most start with high level languages and work their way closer to hardware. But some do that process in reverse.

>Java and Python are fairly standard in most programs.
Sorry, our school did teach us those. The intro sequence used
Python -> Java -> C++ -> Assembly

However languages are about as practical as the courses get, we haven't had anything about databases, network security, or vague hardware stuff. There's not necessarily anything wrong them. But those who want to take the aforementioned courses would more likely be IT majors.

>So you rather just have coding degree? Then why go to an University and not a trade school?
I find pleasure in making computers do interesting things. I need both coding and theory for that.

Theory: Advances ideas
Coding: Expresses them to a machine

>To do any real work in CS requires far more than what is typically taught in "discrete math". If you spend 4 years to supposedly study a subject and get nowhere then yes, that's pretty stupid of you.
Your subjective definition of a "real job" is meaningless to me. To me a "real job" is something that pays well and I enjoy doing.

>>5982685
>>5982687
>And how does that make it better?
It doesn't make it better, I am only voiding the point that it's easy.

>If anything, you just demonstrated that your programme is more like a trade and less of university level studies.
I agree that my program is a mix between practicality and theory but that doesn't make it any less respectable. Engineering is the same way.

>Please link to your programme.
http://www.rit.edu/programs/computer-science
They just switched over from a quarter system to semesters so what I've taken is a little different

>Theoretical CS is deeply routed in the math department and not accessible with only a CS degree
Definitely, if you want to go to grad school a math major would be more suitable.

>Having demonstrable experience in those is more important to an employer than what you learned in CS
Agreed. Luckily aside from labs/projects, where I'm at has a pretty good co-op program where you have a required year of payed work. Having that on your resume makes it way easier to get a job once you graduate.

Still I seriously considered not going to college and working my way up alone, since I can and do teach myself how to program. It's not like any knowledge you learn as an undergrad is exclusive. You can find it all in books and on websites. But the problem is that when you're on your own it's hard to know if you're learning the right stuff, taking the right path. Even if you do it right you might not get hired because it's safer for an employer to choose CS grads. I decided it is better to put up with college's bullshit than risk becoming a NEET, since I have no financial safety net.

>If the majority of CS students fails the simplest math classes, i.e. barely more than revision of high school contents, then it definitely says something about their average intelligence.

>rationalizing your elitism

This takes like 5 seconds to google
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201108/how-brainy-is-your-major

>>5982685
>>5982687
>And how does that make it better?
It doesn't make it better, I am only voiding the point that it's easy.

>If anything, you just demonstrated that your programme is more like a trade and less of university level studies.
I agree that my program is a mix between practicality and theory but that doesn't make it any less respectable. Engineering is the same way.

>Please link to your programme.
http://www.rit.edu/programs/computer-science
They just switched over from a quarter system to semesters so what I've taken is a little different

>Theoretical CS is deeply routed in the math department and not accessible with only a CS degree
Definitely, if you want to go to grad school a math major would be more suitable.

>Having demonstrable experience in those is more important to an employer than what you learned in CS
Agreed. Luckily aside from labs/projects, where I'm at has a pretty good co-op program where you have a required year of payed work. Having that on your resume makes it way easier to get a job once you graduate.

Still I seriously considered not going to college and working my way up alone, since I can and do teach myself how to program. It's not like any knowledge you learn as an undergrad is exclusive. You can find it all in books and on websites. But the problem is that when you're on your own it's hard to know if you're learning the right stuff, taking the right path. Even if you do it right you might not get hired because it's safer for an employer to choose CS grads. I decided it is better to put up with college's bullshit than risk becoming a NEET, since I have no financial safety net.

>If the majority of CS students fails the simplest math classes, i.e. barely more than revision of high school contents, then it definitely says something about their average intelligence.

>rationalizing your elitism

This takes like 5 seconds to google
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201108/how-brainy-is-your-major

>>5983892
>physicist that cares about money

Just go to Wall street jewboy, you will like it there.
Leave science to real man.

>>5981283
It's because it's not actual science.
I hate it and I am not a biased opponent. I have a 2 year CS degree and it was my source of livelihood for several years till I finally transferred to a 4 year and got the engineering degree i so long craved.

>>5984011
it has a terrible name, sorry you were mislead

>>5981331
yeah cause you are fucking europoor.

trying coming to America and learning CS.

This board and thread has some fucking ridiculous ego stroking.

What does /sci/ have to say about CMU's CS program? I asked a few days ago and an elitist said it was also shit tier, insisting that only MIT and somewhat Berkeley have halfway decent CS programs because they integrate them with their EE/CE programs.

>tfw I go cs when I should go discrete math
I think the "trying out a lot of things" is valuable though.

>>5984055
I think it's pretty good, but I'm sure that I'm biased because I go there. They do teach discrete math for two semesters if that means anything.

>>5981283

>>5984735
Excepting the whole MLP stuff, his resumé is great.

>>5984959
What? It's a pretty bad one if you ask me

It's funny, I heard some CS majors today going on about how shitty other peoples' degrees are. Oh, the ironing.

I'm thinking about switching from CS to ChemE. This thread isn't convincing me to stay.

The only class I had to take that was almost exclusively CS (an introduction to discrete math) also happened to be the one with the worst-behaving students. They couldn't keep their mouths shut during class and over half of them spent every second of every lecture on Equestria Daily or Beastforum. It's worth mentioning that there was also a serious homework cheating problem even when homework was worth next to nothing.

>>5982176
>calc 3
>calc 4
>for CS

>>5981331
>2013
>yuropoors think their free education is actually a good education

>>5984700
Holy peewee it's full of idiots

So is CE better than CS then?

>>5987495
Is this a joke anon?
CS is probably 50x better than CE AT LEAST

Because CS is really only good for research jobs or tech support jobs.

Guess which one of those is almost entirely been outsourced to India, guess which one is in such a minority that the competition is ridiculously stiff?

Is SE or CE or C&SE any better?

It's not a bad degree, but it's also not a science. More of an applied math/logic.

As a neuroscience major though, if I could go back and redo college I'd double major in CS. A lot of the cool stuff going on in neuro right now requires a heavy CS background. Unfortunately it's too late for me. I already graduated years ago and I'm 25 and applying to MD/PhD programs. I don't have time or the desire to go back for a second bachelors.

>>5987574
>A lot of the cool stuff going on in neuro right now requires a heavy CS background
Neat. When I left highschool, I almost went on to study neuroscience. I'm ready to go to university next year, and was tossing up between CS, SE and CE. Maybe I'll do a double with neuroscience or bioinformatics or something.

I dont care about intellectual stimulation, I just want lods o emone. Is CS still viable in that case or is there a better science or engineering course for that?

>>5981369
>mfw I start uni this year; geophysics with a petro/mining specialization

I'm going to become the jew.

Is it too late to get a bachelor+masters when you will be done at 29?

>>5987800
in cs*

>>5987800

Of course not, it's never too late

>>5987605

I've heard things like petroleum engineering is better money, depends if you enjoy it and if not if you're willing to do something you don't enjoy