/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12713161]

Does anyone have the picture of the retarded CS monkey calling everything an array?

[Anonymous No.12713175]

>>12713161
CS mocking thread?

[Anonymous No.12713181]

>>12713175
Yes it is. Do you know of the image I'm asking about? It's just a back-and-forth wojak shit comic where the CS monkey just calls anything math related an "array".

[Anonymous No.12713188]

Computer Science was based until they slapped the label on codemonkey python shit .

[Anonymous No.12713232]

>CS fags don't know how to test if a number is even or odd. They need a package for it.

[Anonymous No.12713241]

>>12713232
Shit. Pic related.

Also does anyone have the screenshot of shitty Fizzbuzz answers from interviews?
It was typed up in Notepad++ if I remember correctly?

[Anonymous No.12713254]

>>12713232
At least they're aware enough to know they shouldn't try coding it themselves

[Anonymous No.12713427]

>>12713254

[Anonymous No.12713441]

[Anonymous No.12713484]

>>12713427
>the number is false

[Anonymous No.12713491]

>>12713161
>anon sees all the semi-positive CS threads
>”hmm, lemme just shit up the mix”
Why is this only a /sci/ thing for CS? Nobody does this for physics or engineering.

[Anonymous No.12713493]

>>12713232
They taught me about modulus in high school.

[Anonymous No.12713505]

>>12713161
>CS mock thread
>no CS, just bad code
This is unironically just the code engineering majors write when their only exposure to software is matlab
>t. EE sorta in software

[Anonymous No.12713509]

The problem is that they're calling software development and other codemonkey junk "Computer Science" when it isn't.

[Anonymous No.12713515]

>>12713241
>last 7 days
>shows a gradual increase
Gets me every time. Thanks for reminding me that taking computer engineering with no CS classes wasn't a mistake

[Anonymous No.12713572]

>>12713491
>>anon sees all the semi-positive CS threads
What?
>>12713505
cope
>>12713493
>using modulus
kek

[Anonymous No.12713575]

>>12713515
It's almost at 170,000 weekly now
https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-even

[Anonymous No.12713593]

>>12713515
>he thinks engineering prepared him any better
Gets me every time.
The funniest part is that these packages are used by people like you when you’re presented with any programming that isn’t a short lab monitored by a TA.
I used to do interview duty before grad school. The highest ratio of good candidates to candidates came from math students who had soft.eng. experience, but theirs is a small pool. The second highest was CS majors due to their sheer size - bad ones got filtered through the online code test before the on site interview. The good ones are as good as the math majors.
Last place was shared by physics and EE/CE. Ironically most were mediocre, with a few standouts as good as math and CS majors.

If anything, all this tells me is that you were good at following basic circuit reduction algos, following slides in class, doing some VLSI, and that’s about it. If anything, you’re more likely to codemonkey as engineering majors have generally been the ones to screech “uh yeah I did X in matlab once” as their major code experience. In matlab classes for EE, you either import a package to do something or it’s inbuilt. Knowing how to use fftshift after a transform doesn’t make you less of a codemonkey

[Anonymous No.12713672]

>>12713593
>The highest ratio
>due to their sheer size

CS major proves once again he can't into basic math.

[Anonymous No.12713688]

>>12713672
hmm, didn't say everything in order and misspoke.
When I mean ratio, I mean the ratio of applicants to get acceptances to the number of applicants who made it to on-site testing. I was saying, due to the sheer size of the CS pool, you get a lot of negatives but a lot of OK's to get to on-site. Out of those who make it onto the on-site, the second highest ratio of acceptances come from the CS pool, and due to the sheer number of CS applicants in that pool, *most* acceptances in total come from CS majors.

What I was saying is that while a more than decent amount of engineering and physics people make it on-site, a fairly poor number of them are exemplary at the on-site stage to actually get the acceptance. So while they know the very basics, they're not really good enough at all to solve basic problems under pressure.

[Anonymous No.12713707]

>>12713175
>A huge amount of software engineering doesn't involve this kind of stuff at all

Mathfag here with some (very little) programming experience. Can someone explain? How is this possible? Variables, coefficients, etc. - this is literally basic math and logic. How could you code anything that doesn't involve at least basic math and logic?

Pretty much any program will involve conditional statements, variables, recursion/loops etc. So I'm having trouble understanding how you could code without at least basic arithmetic and logical skills. What do their programs even look like? A bunch of "print" commands? It's like if you had a contractor build you a house and then they told you they don't know how to paint the walls - nobody is expecting you to be a professional artist or interior designer, but if you're building a house, then you at least need to be able to throw a coat of white paint on the walls; it's sort of in the job description.

[Anonymous No.12713726]

>>12713707
You're overthinking it, the answer is simple: That person is an idiot and is wrong.

[Anonymous No.12713739]

>>12713707
Most software development isn't software engineering. And a huge amount of software development doesn't involve any math at all. There is certainly real software engineering like in cryptographic engineering, aircraft software for testing, simulation, interfacing), scientific computing, etc etc. But most jobs aren't these, and both aircraft and cryptography are held to much higher standards than many software jobs because of their involvement in daily safety.

Furthermore, many software dev jobs advertise as software engineering because it's more prestigious to do so. Most of these jobs use variables, conditions, and logic in the most rudimentary or superficial way possible. There's a world of difference between writing aircraft software with strict time and communication protocol constraints and just needing a few statements to make a query to a database living on a remote server somewhere. There is a world of difference between implementing and iterating on a competitive HFT algorithm and writing a wrapper for a few data logs.
There's a world of difference between implementing this:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.10340
and implementing a search function made out of premade sorting algorithms in a library.

[Anonymous No.12713746]

>>12713739
>https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/crash-course/
>machine-learning
Surely this is the sort of programming that doesn't involve math shit like "variables"!

[Anonymous No.12713761]

>>12713746
>https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/crash-course/
It's an incredibly simple crash course into the very basics of ML in order to use ML libraries. People are seething because they thought software was their way to run away from math, but now they have to use *incredibly rudimentary mathematics* to understand how to use some basic libraries.
Like the other anon said, the person is an idiot. There are plenty of people in the field who work with ML just fine. You need to know at the very least linear algebra, some gradient descent methods, the standard calculus sequence, etc.. People who go beyond that know enough measure theory that they can implement new ideas, but those people are usually in research.

[Anonymous No.12713772]

>>12713707
>Mathfag here with some (very little) programming experience. Can someone explain? How is this possible? Variables, coefficients, etc. - this is literally basic math and logic. How could you code anything that doesn't involve at least basic math and logic?

You're better off not knowing what code cs majors actually write.

[Anonymous No.12713780]

>>12713772
IT majors are even worse

[Anonymous No.12713785]

>>12713780
This should be actually criminal.

[Anonymous No.12713794]

>>12713232
>>12713241
unironically javascript's fault for being shit

[Anonymous No.12713796]

>>12713761
>You need to know at the very least linear algebra, some gradient descent methods, the standard calculus sequence, etc..
so high school level math

[Anonymous No.12713798]

>>12713491
Because CS became normie enough to have a high enough supply of these people

[Anonymous No.12713825]

>>12713796
>at the very least
I mean yes, you need to know high school math mentioned in the google crash course. You'd also ought to be able to do undergrad analysis up to basic measure theory and probability measure spaces. But we can continue to play this game of "muh high school" if it strokes your dick right.

[Anonymous No.12713969]

>>12713161
That one?

[Anonymous No.12713973]

>>12713969
That one is pretty cool too.

[Anonymous No.12714025]

>>12713739
>real software engineering like in cryptographic engineering
No, they should never write their own

[Anonymous No.12714039]

>>12713825
>measure spaces
so freshman math

[Anonymous No.12714074]

>>12713969
funny but also retarded.
you're the type of person to ree at this but eat up representation theory, which has the exact same spirit and is largely useful in mathematics
>noo, you shouldn't be able to crystalize representation and examples to our mathematics! it's all definitions!
not even mathematical logicians, among the purest of mathematicians, believe such stupid claims.

[Anonymous No.12714082]

>>12714025
>magically, all the good RSA implementations were written by math and engineering majors
>no CS have their careers on good cryptosystems because of my meme example
>source: dude just trust me

[Anonymous No.12714121]

>>12713969
1) reducing losses the structure
2) reducing losses the structure
3) reducing losses the structure
4) reducing losses the structure (of the geometry)
5) "can't see the forest for the trees" autism
6) try hard to be profound and fails

[Anonymous No.12714135]

>>12714082
>all the good RSA implementations were written by math and engineering majors
Yes
>no CS have their careers on good cryptosystems
That's correct
>source
Have you never taken a crypto class? They should have beaten it into your head you only know enough to get yourself into trouble.

[Anonymous No.12714139]

>>12714121
the picture is retarded, but this is a retarded rebuttal. You can realize a lot of these concepts computationally as "an array or matrix with extra structure" in the same way you can talk about homomorphism being maps with certain structure.
Indeed, using tensors computationally still respects the structure even if they're realized "in memory" as multidimensional arrays.
The metric being an array of numbers is a shitpost though

Why do retards take this argument seriously as some CS fag gotcha? It's just a shitpost.

[Anonymous No.12714145]

[Anonymous No.12714147]

>>12714135
>Have you never taken a crypto class?
Yes, I've taken two. One introductory crypto class and another after a lot more algebra.
This idea that muh math and engineering majors can only grok crypto, or that crypto papers and implementations don't come from CS departments and CS grads regularly is dumb. This is demonstrably false looking at any decent place's bankroll.

[Anonymous No.12714151]

[Anonymous No.12714188]

[Anonymous No.12714191]

>>12713175
it's always kind of sobering to see how adverse people are to basic math, being able to do vector calculus probably makes you a math demigod in relative terms

[Anonymous No.12714205]

>>12714145
high grade refined autism

[Anonymous No.12714209]

>>12714188
>It's always the guy that doesn't capitalize his I's

[Anonymous No.12714211]

>>12713161
Was it this one?

[Anonymous No.12714213]

>>12714145
>refuse to add basic quality of life GUI to shit
>wtf why don't regular people want to use Linux

[Anonymous No.12714230]

>>12714188
This was actually a delightfully devilish move by the CTO to fuck everything up using a CS grad as a fall guy

[Anonymous No.12714280]

>>12713973
now that's basado

[Anonymous No.12714322]

>>12714213
That's not about Linux, it's about GNOME's stupid developers. Another example is telling app developers to do their own window decorations because apparently the window manager is somehow not responsible for window decorations. There's tons of instances of this same kind of stupidity and it's always them.

[Anonymous No.12714360]

>>12714322
GNOME is intrinsically tied to Linux proliferation as a facebook machine

[Anonymous No.12714449]

>>12714360
Nah, Google literally made a Facebook machine with no GNOME at all.

[Anonymous No.12714460]

[Anonymous No.12714462]

>>12714211
>Mixed child
>Father died of stroke.
UH OH.

[Anonymous No.12714489]

>>12714462
Lmao yeah probably just went to the liquor store

[Anonymous No.12714510]

>>12714191
What about tensor calculus?

[Anonymous No.12714517]

>>12714510
How can you do Calculus on an array of numbers?

[Anonymous No.12714518]

>>12713232
~(x & 1)
>>12713493
Unfortunately most languages use % to denote the "remainder" rather than the true modulus. That is, it messes up for negative arguments.

[Anonymous No.12715502]

>>12713175
Holy shit nigga. He never fucking drew a line on a grid before?

[Anonymous No.12715537]

>>12714074
Joke is on you, I am siding with the CS monomaniac on this one. My area of research precisely requires to find encoding of mathematical objects that are better-behaved computationally w.r.t. rewriting systems defined by generators.

The funny thing is that the encoding of the structure per se is fairly irrelevant, what matters more is how the morphisms over that structure behave. Elements of any countable set can be coded by a fucking array of numbers.

[Anonymous No.12715567]

>>12714462
Wait, wouldn’t you just need to use if checks on N%3 and N%5?

[Anonymous No.12715573]

>>12714462
>TFW when this filters you

[Anonymous No.12715593]

>>12714188

everyone in this story is a dumbass

[Anonymous No.12716474]

>>12715567
I wouldn't think most people know what a modulo is, I sure as hell didn't until it was specifically brought up in my various programming classes and I had good teachers.

[Anonymous No.12716488]

>>12713241
>CS
>working on webshit
lel dont get me started on non-CSfags writing atrocious code. From mathfags to phys, you can't write for shit.

[Anonymous No.12716508]

>>12713491
Lurk more

[Anonymous No.12716517]

>>12714517
Am I a brainlet?
The "make a deck of cards, shuffle deck, draw two random cards" doesn't make any sense to me.
I'd think to select a random number between 1 and Deck Size, can't select the same number twice but that's probably not correct.
What's the correct solution?

[Anonymous No.12716541]

>>12714517
>then it will take a long time to type

[Anonymous No.12716542]

>"sci"
>conflates CS with code from beginnen self-taught fags
You guys really are a bunch of retarded highschooler or at best undergrad freshmen and it shows lmao

[Anonymous No.12716546]

>>12713161
I am the retraded CS monkey. But I have mended my ways. Nowadays I call everything an ArrayList.

[Anonymous No.12716659]

>>12713161
>>12713175
>>12714191
Math-phobia and CS go hand in hand

[Anonymous No.12716673]

>>12716542
Coding is unironically the hardest part of CS. The math and theory is so fucking easy.

[Anonymous No.12716684]

>>12716673
>coding
It's so easy to see through your posturing and virtue signalling little freshman.

[Anonymous No.12716707]

>>12716684
>/g/ autism over 'coding' v 'programming'
kek nobody gives a shit here

[Anonymous No.12716718]

>>12714230
Holy shit. That's mad genius level.

[Anonymous No.12716721]

>>12716673
I didn't even heard a single law that mentioned in the meme
>now realized my life is a meme

[Anonymous No.12716724]

>>12715567
Inefficient. Modulo requires a lot of transistors we can't afford. Just have a 2 bit and 3 bit counters and reset them as needed. Easy to implement in 5 flip flops.

[Anonymous No.12716741]

>>12716488
>>CS
>>working on webshit
99% of them go on to work on webshit or appshit.
>dont get me started on non-CSfags writing atrocious code.
goto fuckyourself; //Nobody cares about your design patterns or style rules here
>From mathfags to phys, you can't write for shit
Doesn't change the fact they run circles around you when it comes to algorithms and analysis. :^)

[Anonymous No.12716764]

>>12716741
>design patterns
Again you people show you know nothing about CS aside from the very basics. I'd wager you're not even in STEM but some NEET projecting your insecurities. If its so easy, go ahead and major in CS and make mad money. Phds are up for grabs bro. You're just regurgitating freshman memes thinking you figured it all out. The hubris here is unreal lmao. Maybe at your amerishit college it's watered down, but that doesn't mean shit in the real world. Graduate and get a job first then we'll talk, you dumb ass neet. The level of deluded smugness is fucking cringeworthy lmao.

[Anonymous No.12716772]

>>12713232
x%2==0 ?

[Anonymous No.12716782]

>>12714518
Nobody knows how negative works. Fortunately 99.9% of programming tasks are just copying data from one place to another. It is a glorified manual labor.

[Anonymous No.12716786]

>>12715537
could you give me some resources to this research field? Thanks!

[Anonymous No.12716799]

>>12716724
>Inefficient
anon... you have no idea.

[Anonymous No.12716805]

>>12716786
Type theory and constructive mathematics you can write in there. It's quite a broad field, but the HoTT book, despite its emphasis on the "homotopical" part and the hype it generated, is actually a fairly good introduction to type theory.

https://hott.github.io/book/nightly/hott-online-1280-ga0040d8.pdf

[Anonymous No.12716851]

>>12713427
>The number is false
fuck this got me

[Anonymous No.12716899]

>>12716741
>99% of them go on to work on webshit or appshit.
no, many of them are in jobs between webshit and proper software engineering. The people in webshit and appshit are overwhelmingly "self taught" people who broke in on personal projects
> //Nobody cares about your design patterns or style rules here
this isn't about style rules. There are a good amount of grads who can't write good code, but most of these horror stories are from people without degrees and without rigor to tell them they were doing something dumb. I know your response is gonna be "uh, so a CS major lel?"
>Doesn't change the fact they run circles around you when it comes to algorithms and analysis. :^)
They do? In my experience, despite being "qualified" to do it, many mathfags cannot into algorithms or their analysis, and they coauthor with theoretical CS people when they want to do something constructive or computational, despite the theoretical computer scientist being expected to pick up whatever they need. Being able to give a good algorithm isn't as trivial as CLRS makes it seem. Sure the presentation is simple, but a lot of hours go into making things that seem obvious in hindsight, just like in a proof.
Of course this isn't true of everyone, and many mathematicians are in TCS, but it's just as true that numerous TCS researchers are in math now. After all, it was computer scientists who solved Kadison-Singer, Connes Embedding Conjecture, etc etc., even though these came up in functional analysis and operator theory first. Geometric complexity theory has turned the theoretical computer scientist's eye to algebraic geometry now ;^)
As for physicsfags, in my experience they're not good at all at this.

Like the other anon said, it's painfully clear you only know the basics of what you're talking about and are probably a NEET coping. I love my math and physics homies, especially since my undergrad was both CS and math, but let's not kid ourselves here.

[Anonymous No.12716907]

>>12716517
>The "make a deck of cards, shuffle deck, draw two random cards" doesn't make any sense to me.
It makes perfect sense. It's just not very efficient or sensible thing to do.
>I'd think to select a random number between 1 and Deck Size, can't select the same number twice but that's probably not correct.
Doing it exactly as stated isn't much harder.

int cards[52];
std::generate(cards, cards+52, [](){static int i=0; return i++;});
std::mt19937 mt(std::random_device{}());
std::shuffle(cards, cards+52, mt); //extra step
char suit[4][9]={"spades","diamonds","hearts","clubs"};
char face[4][6]={"Jack","Queen","King", "Ace"};
std::uniform_int_distribution<int> getrandnum(0,51);
int card1=cards[getrandnum(mt)];
int card2=cards[getrandnum(mt)];
while (card2==card1) card2=cards[getrandnum(mt)];
auto printcard=[&](int card){
if(card%13 >8)
std::cout << face[card%13 - 9];
else
std::cout<< card%13 + 2 ;
std::cout<<" of " << suit[card/13];
};

std::cout<<"Card 1 is the ";
printcard(card1);
std::cout<<"\nCard 2 is the ";
printcard(card2);
std::cout<<"\n";

[Anonymous No.12716910]

>>12716782
what are you on about. ~(x & 1) works because two's complement preserves the least significant bit, so if you're an odd 2-comp's integer, your least significant bit is 1 regardless of the sign, which is what the logical AND is checking.

[Anonymous No.12716913]

>>12716805
ah nice, I haven't read the HoTT book proper. I only did up to basic inductive types. Are there any papers you know about effeciently/effectively computational representation of these structures? The most I've done in a field adjacent to this is look at computable analysis, but I admit that I need to study more computability on the level of Soare.

[Anonymous No.12716922]

https://meet.google.com/ihm-mcvs-wsy
alli hay p grupal xd

[Anonymous No.12716923]

>>12716764
>If its so easy, go ahead and major in CS
Why would you waste 4 years of time and money learning next to nothing you could self teach for free.

[Anonymous No.12716927]

>>12716772
x&1 == 0

[Anonymous No.12716938]

>>12714211
>p-please feel sorry for me I have a used vagina

[Anonymous No.12716962]

>>12716923
you can literally self teach math for free, it's all in textbooks.
why do people major in math?

[Anonymous No.12716978]

Today I will remind them.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZACOc-NwV0c

[Anonymous No.12716985]

>>12716899
>The people in webshit and appshit are overwhelmingly "self taught" people who broke in on personal projects
That's just your wishful thinking. Self taught people are overwhelming better than the average CS grad because they actually want to learn.
>but most of these horror stories are from people without degrees
Have you ever spoken to the average CS BS grad. They have the worse code around because 99.95% of them just want a 100K starting jobs and don't give one shit about any of the course material.
>but grad level cs has papers on...
Doesn't make undergrad cs any less brainlet by association.

[Anonymous No.12717083]

>>12714517
Make list. Fill with random cards. Use sort and return random int between - 1 and 1 for compare func. Do random between 0 and deck size. Remove from deck and repeat

[Anonymous No.12717099]

>>12713161
>Science and Maths
>90% of Physicians and Mathematicians I know are WebMonkeys with worse pay than mine
>A new "Jr Dev" in my Department has a PhD in Physics, also with worse pay
Who is the monkey?

[Anonymous No.12717100]

>>12716782
how am I supposed to know -1 has 1 at the least significant bit.

[Anonymous No.12717106]

>>12717099
better pay than being a postdoc

[Anonymous No.12717110]

Stop it /sci/, you'll hurt the in-denial plebbitors (/g/) feelings.

[Anonymous No.12717116]

>>12716899
>The people in webshit and appshit are overwhelmingly "self taught" people who broke in on personal projects
That's just your wishful thinking. Self taught people are overwhelming better than the average CS grad because they actually want to learn the material.
>but most of these horror stories are from people without degrees
Have you ever spoken to the average CS BS grad. They have the worst code and the worst problem solving abilities around because 99.95% of them just want a 100K starting job and don't give one shit about any of the course material. Stop associating people who apply for jobs they're completely unqualified for (which happens in every field and position btw) with actually self taught people. Those are 2 completely different groups. The guy hoping to just disappear in the background in a large corp and collect paychecks that looks like a deer in headlights when you ask them to code hello world is not an example of a self taught individual.
>but grad level CS has papers on...
Doesn't make undergrad CS any less brainlet by association.
>it's painfully clear you only know the basics of what you're talking about
I actually graduated with highest honors in CS after being tricked by people like you who swear up and down that CS is very theoretical, mathematical, and challenging. And no, my school is actually highly ranked for CS.

[Anonymous No.12717145]

>>12717116
>Self taught people are overwhelming better than the average CS grad because they actually want to learn the material.
lol I wish this were the case, but the only reason you don't see more of them is because they literally don't pass onto the interviews. Why is that? They get into the same first round online tests and get weeded out.
>they want to learn the material
no lol, most want a bootcamp or a single course to start writing code. I know, I've talked to many of them. Granted, your average CS major isn't super bright, but as a pool they're much more qualified.
>Have you ever spoken to the average CS BS grad.
I have. I've also spoken to a lot of them above the average, and the difference is staggering. These people above the average are pretty significant.
>They have the worst code and the worst problem solving abilities around because 99.95% of them just want a 100K starting job
these people get weeded out of any screening and interviewing process. have you ever done a whiteboard interview?
>Stop associating people who apply for jobs they're completely unqualified for (which happens in every field and position btw) with actually self taught people.
wat. you're trying to put these two groups in direct comparison, except now saying that most CS majors are woefully unqualified for the jobs they apply for..except the only commonality is that both these groups get weeded out. Again, have you ever done an interview?
>Doesn't make undergrad CS any less brainlet by association.
I agree that CS undergrad needs to be more comprehensive and harder. But I think are set up at good schools that it's about as hard as you like, rather than being statically somewhat nontrivial like engineering majors.
>I actually graduated with highest honors in CS
lmao, ofc, everyone on /sci/ did so too buddy. I have no reason to believe you, and everything here sounds like "i'm bitter on /sci/ and want a quick gotcha"

[Anonymous No.12717146]

>>12716724
> Modulo requires a lot of transistors we can't afford.
What is this, 1977?

[Anonymous No.12717147]

>>12713175
I probably know what these are but because I am an ESL I never learned the English names

[Anonymous No.12717178]

>>12717147
the redditors probably do too, but they see a new word and screech instead of searching for a definition

[Anonymous No.12717246]

>>12713969
That's it!

[Anonymous No.12717303]

>>12713175
>variables and coefficients
>linear equations
>graphs of functions
>histograms
How the hell would you code ANYTHING without variables and coefficients in the first place?

[Anonymous No.12717320]

This thread actually helped me out with my anxiety of being a physicist. All jobs I have looked at said: "lol we want you to have Comp Sci degree"

[Anonymous No.12717329]

>>12717320
what are you trying to say? this is your cope thread after not being able to apply?

[Anonymous No.12717417]

>>12717320
You will earn less than a CS graduate and your job propsects are worse lol

[Anonymous No.12717427]

>>12717303
>variables and coefficients
They mean solving algebraic equations that have variables and coefficients. Not just using variables and coefficients.

[Anonymous No.12717431]

>>12717417
Not true.

[Anonymous No.12717523]

>>12717431
wait this is actually true though. why do you think there's so much academic brain drain in CS?
industry literally pays top dollar for talent.

[Anonymous No.12717533]

>>12717523
>all cs degree are phds
>all cs kiddies get phd salaries
kek

[Anonymous No.12717543]

>>12713427
>the number is false
Fucking lost haha holy shit

[Anonymous No.12717554]

[Anonymous No.12717559]

>>12717533
no, not even. The positions that CS BSc's go for are heavily competitive at the top level and are largely occupied by CS majors from good schools. You don't even need to take my word for it - literally look at their cryptosystems and real time systems teams making top dollar and you'll find most of them have CS education from some a good school.
One cannot argue that CS is both marketable and very hot in the job market right now, especially compared to math and physics undergrads. As for PhD positions, I don't even need to tell you why those are competitive.
This isn't even something to rub salt in the wound. This is literally undeniable fact.

[Anonymous No.12717565]

>>12717554
>implying abraham lincoln posting isn't literally /sci/

[Anonymous No.12717575]

>>12717329
No, it helps me see what CS majors actually can do, so I now have no reason not to apply and simply prove that I am more capable.

>>12717417
OK, current job I have started at $76K and I now earn $106k after three years. Don't know if you CS nerds make double of that, but I think I am comfy enough. I am just seeking another job because I find the current work dull.

[Anonymous No.12717601]

>>12713161
This is like the sixth thread I see where someone asks for a meme I made lol.

[Anonymous No.12717609]

>>12717575
first of all
>physicist
if you're a BS holder in physics, you're not a physicist. if you're a BS holder in math, you're not a mathematician. if you're a BS holder in CS, you're not a computer scientist.
Anyway, most of the stuff shown here is written by codemonkeys without degrees.
>now I have no reason not to apply
by all means, go for it. But the ability to solve out simple thermo problems and rote calculate some eigenvalues for energies doesn't make you actually capable lmao

[Anonymous No.12717662]

>>12717559
>The positions that CS BSc's go for are heavily competitive at the top level and are largely occupied by CS majors from good schools
No, they hire from a ton of different disciplines.
>literally look at their cryptosystems and real time systems teams making top dollar and you'll find most of them have CS education from some a good school.
Those jobs are for master degree holders and higher. Usually with backgrounds in CpE/ECE for real time or math for cryptosystems.

Here's the first result on google
>Requirements:
• PhD in Cryptography, emphasis on efficient and provably secure protocols
• Excellent record of peer-reviewed publications, in particular at IACR, ACM, and IEEE conferences
• Experience in the implementation of cryptographic protocols in C or Rust
• Working well within a cross-functional team
• Good understanding of practical systems and their security
• Experience as a postdoctoral researcher or industry researcher is a plus
• Experience with distributed protocols and blockchain protocols is a plus
• Experience in fast multiparty computation protocols is a plus.

[Anonymous No.12717676]

>>12717559
You sound like a freshman in cs desperate to validate his major choice and only listens to positive misinformation from your fellow cs classmates.

[Anonymous No.12717685]

>>12715537
>isomorphic cyclic groups
>of order two

[Anonymous No.12717686]

>>12717565
>implying this isn't common knowledge

[Anonymous No.12717707]

The original

[Anonymous No.12717806]

>>12717662
>No, they hire from a ton of different disciplines.
no disagreement there
>Those jobs are for master degree holders and higher.
No, cryptosystems engineering is something that hires out of bachelor's. look at any of the FAANG's company's cryptosystems teams for their SWE openings.
> Usually with backgrounds in CpE/ECE for real time or math for cryptosystems.
Nah, I wouldn't say this is "usual." There's a mix of backgrounds, but you see a lot CS there "usually." Look at any conference for cryptography and security and this should be apparent.
>first result on google
Again, I said cryptosystems engineering. If you want to get into the crypto team from the cryptography side, you're doing different tasks. It's the difference between creating new protocols from the random oracle model vs. implementing the protocol, both of which are highly nontrivial.

I'm not saying these things are exclusive. Obviously there's a place for everyone, but this idea that CS majors or CS grads don't occupy these in a majority or at least a nontrivial amount is bad faith arguments. You're literally trying to heavily justify the perceived additional work you're doing, or pretending that the other side doesn't do it, could never grok it, etc etc.. It's not even shitposting at this point - most of you actually argue like you buy into this.

[Anonymous No.12717841]

>>12717686
>doing CS to get entry level programming jobs
That's your mistake. You do a CS degree in the same way you do a math degree - grad is where you get access to interesting work.
Or you apply to highly competitive SWE positions where they do have many CS degree holders. Intro level programming positions to do literally nothing accepts everyone, but this post overstates the amount of math and engineering majors at top level positions lmao.

[Anonymous No.12717863]

>>12717685
What bothers you? The plural? "Up to isomorphism" does not actually allow you to identify two structures, you have been brainwashed by category theory. You essentially need a univalent foundation for this to work. In ZF the encodings of your structures matter since the theory allows to poke at sets in horrible ways. Do you believe that [math]\mathbb{Z} \in \pi^{\sqrt{\varnothing}} [/math]?

[Anonymous No.12717982]

Virgin math and science nerds seething over CS grad whos making 80-120k a year programming with a babe in his tesla

Keep seething from a microsoft programmer/researcher making 90k

[Anonymous No.12717992]

>>12713441
X could be a pointer pseud

[Anonymous No.12718053]

>>12717841
>>12717806
You stink of freshman

[Anonymous No.12718090]

>>12718053
>the freshman with pipe dreams of his immediate employability or over inflated sense of competence calling freshman
lmao

[Anonymous No.12718111]

>>12718090
>you don't need theory to get intro level programming positions
>but cs majors will have a upper hand because they know theory they won't use
>but physics majors won't even though they know harder theory they won't use
>everyone who disagrees with me is 12
>my life plan is perfect, signed off by other freshman in cs

[Anonymous No.12718141]

>>12716923
credentialism is still real dude.

[Anonymous No.12718209]

>>12718111
>>you don't need theory to get intro level programming positions
This is literally true. Unless you want to do FAANG or specialized positions, most entry level programming positions are monkey tier and take basic skills.
>>but cs majors will have a upper hand because they know theory they won't use
CS majors have an upper hand in the resume searches and preference for certain career paths, but I didn't insist they have any other big benefits. What I did say is that any good CS major at a good school has no major disadvantages in the context of a job search, despite everyone saying, "uhh employers think math and physics is smarter." They don't really care.
>>but physics majors won't even though they know harder theory they won't use
see above.
>>everyone who disagrees with me is 12
I never said this. You're the one who called me a freshman despite spouting out freshmen misconceptions
>>my life plan is perfect, signed off by other freshman in cs
I haven't been in undergrad for years now. I'm a fucking mathfag dumbfuck. Math is great but you should be intimately aware of how just a BS in math looks vs a BS in CS or engineering, and you should know that most employers don't give a shit about math until you get a PhD. Literally nobody cares about analysis or algebra in industry until you do research on problems people apply.

[Anonymous No.12718232]

>>12717992
Then use a static_cast, pseud.

[Anonymous No.12718669]

>>12718111
>>my life plan is perfect, signed off by other freshman in cs
you come off as someone bitter or insecure that they aren't as employable with their BS as they want to be, and that you need to constantly encroach on conversations about software jobs and CS majors in some sort of race.
Nobody is talking about their "life plan" here. People here are saying there are multiple ways to get into what you want, but the CS major isn't the "hopeless brainlet path that gets beat out every time" this board likes to advertise it as.

[Anonymous No.12718689]

>>12717992
NULL and nullptr is always false
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57527189/is-nullptr-falsy

[Anonymous No.12718693]

>>12713161
>implying cs majors know arrays
KeK. Only the very best of them can understand arrays...

[Anonymous No.12718696]

>>12718141
Get a BS in literally anything else and get a Masters/PhD in CS

[Anonymous No.12718701]

>>12718693

[Anonymous No.12718704]

>>12718696
a BS in literally anything else is not as employable. You could go for a CS minor to hit the keyword search, but you don't get it nearly as much as CS and engineering majors.

[Anonymous No.12718706]

>>12718696
>get a PhD to be competitive with CS majors with only a BS

[Anonymous No.12718712]

>>12718701

[Anonymous No.12718725]

>>12718704
Are you retarded?
>>12718706
>wanting to get a pleb webdev job
>>>/g/orillas are that way

[Anonymous No.12718726]

>>12718712
please tell me someone made this as a joke

[Anonymous No.12718728]

>>12718704
>t. typical braindead cs major who only cares about getting a job rather than the subject material

[Anonymous No.12718735]

>>12718726
Someone made this as a joke

[Anonymous No.12718736]

>>12718712
Here's a puzzle: try to figure out a situation where pic related is actually good practice. (protip: there exist such).

[Anonymous No.12718738]

>>12718735
Thank you anon

[Anonymous No.12718739]

>>12718726
It's java code so probably not.

[Anonymous No.12718756]

>>12718735
No see >>12718736

[Anonymous No.12718776]

>>12718725
>pleb webdev job
those aren't what I'm talking about lel. the SWE I jobs at good companies that are competitive are the ones i'm talking about. Again, these positions are entry level but don't have to do with webshit. Are you really gonna do a PhD to get competitive at SWE I, or are you gonna admonish people for doing so by getting a BS in CS who *may* get a PhD and go into crypto research instead anyway?

This comes off as a mix of salt and actual ignorance

[Anonymous No.12718781]

>>12718728
Is this your best defense? That I might not care about the material? Lmao who said that? what evidence do you have for me having not learned the material?
could you have missed that I'm >>12718209?

[Anonymous No.12718795]

>>12718736
Never as you're doing on average 32 string comparison checks.

for(int i=0;i<10;++i)
for(int j=0;j<6;++j)
decEquivalent[i]=decEquivalent[i]<<1+binDataArray[i][j]=='1';

24 ops per outer loop verses 768 for >>12718712

>but that's a look up table i heard of in muh cs courses!
No a look up table would be like

dec2bin[]={"000000", "000001", ... "111111"};
binEquivalent[i]=dec2bin[decDataArray[i]];

[Anonymous No.12718802]

>>12718776
>SWE I jobs at good companies that are competitive
Doing monkey work.

[Anonymous No.12718814]

>>12718802
>monkey work
whatever lets you sleep at night lol

[Anonymous No.12718816]

Seriously, how do people buy the "zero is natural" meme?

[Anonymous No.12718821]

[Anonymous No.12718825]

>>12718704
>>12718776
CS doesn't put you at the top of the pile. If anything, it puts you at the bottom.

[Anonymous No.12718828]

[Anonymous No.12718830]

[Anonymous No.12718855]

>>12718825
>oh no a company qualified that you have a good CS degree in a field where people try to apply with an associates so as not to waste their time
this is supposed to convince me how?
we know computer science is a name attached to a lot of shitters, but we also know that computer science is hot here for some key reasons.

[Anonymous No.12718863]

>>12718855
A good cs degree is the exception and not the rule. This will affect how employers look at it.

[Anonymous No.12718953]

>>12718863
>A good cs degree is the exception and not the rule
CS undergrad ought to be more rigorous all around, but that's not exactly true that good schools are the exception. If you're anywhere in the top 30, you're on a good company's radar. They already have to train you regardless of your background, and the best way to break into is internships.
Employers all around don't care that much, especially if you hit the buzzwords, have internships, research, etc. Like any other position.

Dude, you're really trying to paint this hypothetical that everyone dislikes the CS major in industry when this is not true.

[Anonymous No.12719078]

>>12718830
int mult(int a, int b){
int prod=0;
if(b<0){
a=-a;
b=-b;
}
while(b){
if(b&1)
prod+=a;
a+=a;
b>>=1;
}
return prod;
}

I've seen 400 level cs crypto classes struggling to understand this simple obvious algorithm.

[Anonymous No.12719109]

>>12713241
>one dependency

[Anonymous No.12719814]

cs is a copegree

[Anonymous No.12719825]

>>12719814
Cope

[Anonymous No.12719955]

>>12713969
>You can't quantify that
n-n-no u

[Anonymous No.12719959]

>>12716782
>It is a glorified manual labor.
It's literally a trade like a plumber and electrician.

[Anonymous No.12719965]

>>12718816
Absolutely none

[Anonymous No.12720110]

>>12714211
Other than the mixed race baby she is unironically a good mom. Incels on /g/ seething because their genes won’t propagate at all (even if hers got shat on)

[Anonymous No.12720170]

>>12714517
I've never interview for a job that requires programming knowledge but If I'm in an interview and they ask to write a function to sum the first n numbers. Could I just write
sum(n) {
return 0.5*n*(n+1);
}
or do they actually expect you to write a loop?

[Anonymous No.12720232]

>>12719078
To be honest, this is easier to understand if you generalize it to an arbitrary monoid, or even a power-associative magma.

[Anonymous No.12720389]

>>12713161
These threads made me go into ATP, I'll get my revenge on you math fags for making fun of me. I'll automate the one thing you love in life.

[Anonymous No.12720412]

>>12713973
>Is able to explain from first principles why the porn he holds on his computer is not actually illegal
Where do I learn such powers?

[Anonymous No.12720457]

>>12720412
If you study maths, with a bit of practice you'll learn to trick the person grading your exam into believing your proof is correct even though you're clueless. The same tactic applies when in court.

Example: "This is a trivial consequence of the Yoneda embedding."

[Anonymous No.12720481]

>>12720457
>If you study maths, with a bit of practice you'll learn to trick the person grading your exam into believing your proof is correct even though you're clueless
I study math but I don't know what you're talking about. Can you give an example?

[Anonymous No.12720487]

>>12719109
Yeah, it's the is-odd package
I'm not joking

[Anonymous No.12720490]

>>12720481
>Can you give an example?
Given that you can't read, I have no problem understanding why you don't know what I am talking about.

[Anonymous No.12720492]

>>12720481
>I don't know what you're talking about.
Looks like the proof is correct then.

[Anonymous No.12720633]

>>12716659
The programming part of CS was my least favorite part back at uni tbqh. I can't understand why would you go to university instead of a bootcamp if you are not into math.

[Anonymous No.12720865]

>>12713973

[Anonymous No.12720882]

>>12720865
But seriously, a matrix is not an array. You can use array to store a matrix, but there must be extra markings to give it a structure of a matrix. You cannot just point to an array and say it is a matrix.

[Anonymous No.12720887]

>>12716899
high IQ post.

[Anonymous No.12720891]

>>12720490
I meant an actual example. "This is a trivial consequence of the Yoneda embedding." doesn't even tell what the problem was.

[Anonymous No.12720909]

>>12713969

[Anonymous No.12720915]

>>12714147
He's talking about code that is secure and usable in production.

[Anonymous No.12720921]

>>12714145
The idea is to use the volume control of the OS or your speakers instead...

[Anonymous No.12720922]

>>12713969

[Anonymous No.12721042]

>>12720922
Not good. This would work if you made it category theory flavored.

[Anonymous No.12721146]

>>12714230
The madlad. He would make an excellent politician.

[Anonymous No.12721241]

>>12716673

[Anonymous No.12721243]

>>12713707
They don't view those things as math. Because it's text on a screen.
Solve 2x=10 for x is what they are talking about.

Also as somebody studying comp sci there are tons of these idiots in the first semesters who think it's about coding cool things and shit themselves at the first sign of math. I know you faggots want to pretend we comp sci is bullshit, but I studied engineering for a couple of semesters and the math lectures were the same.
Suck my dick

[Anonymous No.12721573]

>>12716907
Wrong answer.
You write out an array like he did and display the card using a switch case for all 52 cards.

[Anonymous No.12721641]

>>12716899
You ever notice how the only good computer scientists are those who have degrees in math or physics? Not a single good computer scientist is specialized having only comp sci knowledge.

[Anonymous No.12721690]

>>12720882
A matrix is an array of arrays.

[Anonymous No.12721752]

>>12717609
>BS holder
kek okay mate, I am guessing you are american since you even assume that I consider a BS to be worth anything.

[Anonymous No.12721803]

>>12720170
No, they want you to give the constant time solution. Just be prepared to justify it (not hard, but they don't want people who regurgitate the answer) shortly. Obviously, both summing the first n numbers and then the numbers from n to m where m >= n should also be trivially constant.

[Anonymous No.12721840]

>>12721690
an array of arrays is not a matrix.

[Anonymous No.12721877]

>>12721752
No, I assume so because people on this stupid board tends to consider undergrad sufficient to be called a computer scientist...even though they're eager to compare "computer scientists" to PhD holders in math and physics kek.
In either case, your actual claim is even worse because you're trying to style on literal BS holders with a PhD, the minimum to be a real physicist. Pretty sad.

[Anonymous No.12721985]

>>12721752
A BS means about as much as a minor. At my university, a minor required 36 credit hours from all the courses offered in the department, whereas a major required 72 credit hours from all the courses offered in the department. See the problem? If the depth of material needed to complete a BS is the same as the depth required for a minor, with the only difference between the two being breadth in courses taken, then a BS only qualifies you as an expert (i.e. a [x]ist) as much as a minor does. That's obviously nonsense.

A bachelor's degree has always been one designed to give you a survey of a field. True depth doesn't start until at least the master's level, and even then a master's is basically just a closer look at a topic. You need a PhD to call yourself even close to an expert in a field. At the very least, a PhD is the bare minimum to call yourself an [x]ist.

[Anonymous No.12722019]

>>12721877
Exactly. Another way to think about it: if a BS qualifies you to call yourself a physicist, why is a BS insufficient to teach physics at even a community college level?

[Anonymous No.12722039]

>>12721840
yes it is.
Numpy says so

[Anonymous No.12722040]

>>12721641
>You ever notice how the only good computer scientists are those who have degrees in math or physics?
Are we talking about undergrads or PhD holders? I'm assuming first the claim that computer scientists (PhD holders in CS) have a math or physics degree (bachelor's)
This isn't true. It's pretty common for computer science PhD candidates to come from both math and CS backgrounds, less common but not uncommon to come from physics. But there are plenty of top theorists who have only a CS background who do top theory work. I mean, look at Jelani Nelson, Jeff Erickson, Ketan Mulmuley, Eric Allender, etc etc.. to have nothing but a CS background but work with traditional math from functional analysis to algebraic geometry. There are many more numerous examples.
>only comp sci knowledge
dumbfuck, you learn what you want and what you need as a PhD. There is no knowledge in isolation from context. Why are you acting as though computer science academia is at once full of these math geniuses with "esoteric" knowledge leading departments and leading papers, and yet there are no computer scientists who use and build upon these results and techniques? Either computer scientists were competent to begin with, or this "every good computer scientist was really a mathematician or physicist" bullshit needs to die.

As far as the claim that good computer scientists (researchers with papers in CS) have degrees in math and physics (PhD), this is a fucking dumb claim and is easily remedied by looking at h-indices, the top theory papers at places like FOCS and STOC, etc.. Hell, look at Kadison-Singer or Connes Embedding Conjecture, both pure math questions answered by computer scientists. Were they also mathematicians in disguise?

[Anonymous No.12722089]

>>12716673
>muh CS theory is about sorting and freshman level induction
this meme is funny but infuriating that most people here unironically believe this is what people defend when they defend CS

[Anonymous No.12722220]

>>12713241
that's 80% indians, I guarantee it

[Anonymous No.12722262]

>>12722089
That is undergrad cs, a meme

[Anonymous No.12722380]

>>12722262
nah, even at less that decent schools, you'll find better theory electives. Just because the core requirements at many schools is eh doesn't really mean those schools don't offer theory electives that clearly show off non sorting theory.
whether they're "good" is somewhat irrelevant, though they really ought to be.
The blue man is the convenient strawman for /sci/ since it allows them to consistently ignore all contrary claims lmao.

[Anonymous No.12722399]

>>12722380
You are one triggered comp sci faggot. We all know you get lucrative jobs. We just trash your inability to understand any math. Just like business majors. You're cut from the same cloth.
>No guys you don't get it, building a portfolio requires tough work!

[Anonymous No.12722401]

>>12720110
You didn't look at her git, LinkedIn, or her articles. Shit was hilarious

[Anonymous No.12722432]

>>12716724
Most versions of this task only ask you to check numbers up to 100, don't be autistic

[Anonymous No.12722467]

>>12717554
learning about "pee cee" building is a waste of time, it's glorified legos and a toy for adult children
you only really need a laptop or pre-built tower to get work done
anything beyond that is a hobbyist toy
do people who build PCs do any soldering?

[Anonymous No.12722621]

>>12722432
But it's so beautiful
for(int counter=1, three=1, five=1; counter<101; ++counter, ++three, ++five){
if(three==3){
cout<<"Fizz";
three=0;
}
if(five==5)
cout<<"Buzz";
five=0;
}
if(three&&five)
cout<<counter;
cout<<'\n';
}

[Anonymous No.12722647]

>>12722467
>pre-built tower
>>>/g/tfo

[Anonymous No.12722730]

>>12720922
LMAO

[Anonymous No.12722887]

>>12722399
>You are one triggered comp sci faggot
lmao no
>We
lmao, imagine speaking as the "we" on a 4chan board. there is no "we" - this is just you.
>We just trash your inability to understand any math. Just like business majors.
>inability
lmao as if. Does the idea that I could do math bother you? Is it the cope that you need? Does it make you uncomfortable that all of your knowledge of imaginary number fields, borel sets, lebesgue integration, poincare duality, modules, meromorphic functions, etc. aren't sacred? Does the idea really bother you that much?

You likely don't even know these basic concepts from undergrad, seeing as how you're not even contesting the claim that CpE and EE actually know math. You know, these people who learn calculus, a similarly brainlet discrete math course, and then have their courses spoonfeed them formulas? The CpE is left with little to no real math to tackle CS problems lmao.

[Anonymous No.12724209]

>>12722887
>imagine speaking as the "we" on a 4chan board. there is no "we" - this is just you.
Lurk moar newfag.

[Anonymous No.12724307]

>>12722621
nice, though I kind of feel like that's also what someone who doesn't know modulo would come up with, though obviously not as tight.
Honest question, Assembly also has modulo, is that also inefficient in terms of transistors?

[Anonymous No.12725014]

>>12722887
>Does it make you uncomfortable that all of your knowledge of imaginary number fields, borel sets, lebesgue integration, poincare duality, modules, meromorphic functions, etc. aren't sacred? Does the idea really bother you that much?
I have a master's in computer science, and the most complex stuff I've ever dealt with was partial differential equations and calculus of variations. I have no clue what the fuck the things you listed even are. I can do fizzbuzz in one line, though, and I know how to build hydralisks in starcraft.

[Anonymous No.12725237]

>>12725014
a masters in CS isn't shit when it comes to knowledge or versatility, especially compared to a PhD. The masters in CS specifically is usually nothing more than a few courses that give you some extra technical knowledge but nothing substantial.

[Anonymous No.12725241]

>>12725014
nice false flag lmao

[Anonymous No.12725336]

>>12725237
>a masters in CS isn't shit when it comes to knowledge or versatility, especially compared to a PhD.
Well, I'll be getting my PhD in ~2 years. I doubt my maths skills are going to dramatically improve in that time. Especially since I have literally zero interest in any of that more esoteric stuff. I suppose there are plenty of CS doctors and doctoral students who do work on maths like that, but my own case proves that it's definitely not all. Not even close.

[Anonymous No.12725637]

>>12724307
>Honest question, Assembly also has modulo, is that also inefficient in terms of transistors?

More like it takes a lot of cycles

[Anonymous No.12725907]

>>12725336
That's weird, since every CS theorist I know is either deep into the annals of discrete math and algebra, or they're deep into logic and topology, with analysis getting more and more popular for learning theorists and people in randomized algorithms.
Then again I'm talking about CS theorists, not just CS PhD's as a whole

[Anonymous No.12725913]

>>12720487
IsEven() returns !IsOdd()
Work smart not hard

[Anonymous No.12726234]

>>12714517
>then it will take a long time to type
very well

[Anonymous No.12726997]

>>12714517
most of these people seem like non-degree holders and bootcamps boomers, not CS grads

[Anonymous No.12727518]

>>12726997
>CS grads aren't better than bootcamp boomers
Pretty sure that's the point of this whole thread.

[Anonymous No.12727633]

Thing is, CS wages should be even higher without all the artificial downward pressures they're putting on us.

[Anonymous No.12727830]

>>12714460
supreme

[Anonymous No.12728032]

>>12714460
>to store the double 12.34 correctly
I can't even

We learned binary in fucking school.

[Anonymous No.12728285]

>>12716764
if you think America has shit STEM universities, i am not sure if you are going to make it

[Anonymous No.12728377]

>>12714518
thanks for that first reply i had never seen that before and now i am using it

[Anonymous No.12728404]

>>12727518
But that’s a retarded take lol

[Anonymous No.12728509]

>>12728032
>>12714460
The last part about the floating point error isn’t the worst question in the world. It’s a small but important thing to know that x /= 100 depends only on the fractional approximation errors on x whereas x *= (0.1 * 0.1) has much more error.

[Anonymous No.12728743]

>BS in Mathematics with a minor in IT
>BS in Computer Science with a minor in applied mathematics

I'm torn, what do

[Anonymous No.12729003]

>>12713427
This has to be from a pajeet

[Anonymous No.12729055]

>>12726997
>t. has never spoken to a cs grad for longer than 5 minutes

[Anonymous No.12729077]

>>12714460

[Anonymous No.12729100]

>>12728032
struct dollarNcents{
int cents : 7;
int dollar : 25;
};

:^)

[Anonymous No.12729108]

>>12728377
bitwise not is stupid there
(x&1)==0 or ! (x&1)

[Anonymous No.12729164]

>>12729055
I have. They vary in quality but nobody who has gone to school get tripped up on this type of question. If you had posted a monkey solution to a leetcode question, I'd have believed you.

[Anonymous No.12729272]

>>12729100
Genius solution.

[Anonymous No.12729614]

>>12721803
What do you mean by "be prepared to justify it" I honestly don't see how that would need more justification than "it's constant time". Or do you mean justify the formula? Should I just casually drop a proof in the middle of a job interview?

[Anonymous No.12729828]

>>12729614
>I honestly don't see how that would need more justification than "it's constant time"
it's trivially constant time, you don't need to justify that.
>Should I just casually drop a proof in the middle of a job interview?
I mean, yes? You don't have to go into every detail, but just mention it's the Gauss sum. If they ask you "how do you know it works?" tell them
>assume n is even. pair 1 and n, 2 and n - 1, etc.., and the formula comes out immediately. the calculation is slightly different for odd n but has the same result
but if you're not comfortable with that, just say
> it's simple induction to verify
if they just asked that question to see if you can use a loop, just write the loop afterwards.

[Anonymous No.12730254]

>>12720922
ok this is epic

[Anonymous No.12730359]

[Anonymous No.12731224]

>>12730359
lmao @ yandev

[Anonymous No.12731248]

>>12714517
I did not know that formula for sum of n numbers

[Anonymous No.12731289]

>>12714517
I have low self esteem and when i see people how little it takes to be recognized as more than a piece of shit, which i consider myself, i get shocked.

[Anonymous No.12731391]

>>12714517
"There are logic errors too" genuinely sounds like something out of a comedy skit or a joke.

[Anonymous No.12731806]

>>12713707
Well tobh, graph of function, linear equations, coefficients and histograms don't really come up in software development where you're making a program that say for example sends messages between clients, or displays a todo list, or adds up a bill or generates a pdf(for which there is probably a library) and emails it etc. Variables are there but it's literally a name we give to store something - that's not how you define them in maths.

>>12714211
>Bashing them for code they used for learning
That's garbage, I literally put everything on github I made from the smallest project, this is the actually unironically retarded, only smartasses without the smarts do that.

[Anonymous No.12732573]

>>12713254
holy shit, this was made as a joke right? r-right?!

[Anonymous No.12733238]

>>12714025
you're misapplying the "never role your own crypto", it means don't make your own algorithms, not your own code. someone has to program it

[Anonymous No.12733553]

>>12732573
Yes

[Anonymous No.12733578]

>>12713688
we get it, you're a retard

[Anonymous No.12733591]

>>12721243
Used to be literally me. I was a really good programmer but shat myself at anything math related. It wasn't until I skimmed a book on calculus that I realized that the logic of programming was derived from mathematics and it clicked.

[Anonymous No.12733860]

>>12733578
>noooo stop telling me engineering majors aren't as good as they say they are
>i'm going to hyperfocus on one trivial mistake so your argument is false
you're the retard here

[Anonymous No.12733932]

>>12713707
>how can you code...
Oh, sweet innocent child.

Have you ever asked yourself the question "Why is my computer/phone that has the processing power of a supercomputer from a decade or two ago having trouble with opening a site meant to show me an email?"

[Anonymous No.12733956]

>>12732573
Sadly no.

[Anonymous No.12733973]

>>12733238
Monkey work that uses a pre-made library. Hardly proves you need a cs degree from a top school that you can't self teach with a different stem degree.

[Anonymous No.12734061]

>>12721243
>and the math lectures were the same
Kek no shit? It's almost like math is math or something.

[Anonymous No.12735456]

>>12733973
>pre made library
No, stop being a brainlet. Cryptographic work is attacked from many angles and requires multiple people with multiple backgrounds to do correctly. It isn’t “muh math majors do the work and write libraries, then CS majors put it all together.” That’s not even close.
The person you’re replying to isn’t exactly right either - what they likely mean is that there’s a difference between engineering a protocol and engineering an algorithm and cryptosystem that securely implements the protocol. When you work in the engineering, you don’t make changes to core protocol in a vacuum because the protocol is (likely) based in provable security given stringent assumptions.

As an cryptographic engineer, many of which come from the CS side, you’d be working on understanding and implementing protocol, working on solving the hard problems with cryptography in less-than-ideal conditions, doing a lot of hardware-software interfacing with HSMs, etc..
>self study
It is as easy to self study whatever you want. And none of it really matters on the job because they have to retrain you regardless of background. The truth of the matter is that many people who brag about being able to self study an entire field end up not self studying to any meaningful degree, while people who are qualified just did what they liked to get there. There are a lot of CS majors and a more than decent amount of math majors in cryptographic engineering. Many of them work in understanding the math and even working to the very low level. They were all trained on the job in the same way and expected to do the same duties. Given they all went through the same interview process and passed, they perform at roughly the same aptitude. Get your head out of your ass.

[Anonymous No.12736222]

>>12735456
they ignore posts like this but give mass replies to everything else because this is reasonable and reminds them that nobody past undergrad really gives a shit about your degree - it's all about your experience and the work you've produced.

It still cracks me up to this day that so many EE's choke up on simple questions about writing loops despite being so "intellectually superior."

[Anonymous No.12737154]

>>12733932
>trouble opening an email
This doesn’t happen lmao.
There are brainlet webdevs but no email client has lagged out a smartphone for more than half a decade

[Anonymous No.12737458]

>>12728743
BS in Computer Science with a minor in applied mathematics.

[Anonymous No.12737690]

>>12713969
Why are some undergrads like this? This reminds of one time I was helping an engineering friend with her linear algebra homework and said something like "a linear transformation is just a matrix" when one of her friends in physics fucking shrieked at me that I was wrong and what I meant to say was that "every matrix has associated a linear transformation." At first I felt like explaining to her about isomorphisms but I decided against it and just told her to stop being so pedantic and shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.12737811]

>>12713241
Thats why you learn language agnostic fundementals. Or just learn C. I hate it when people justify their mockery like this.

[Anonymous No.12737901]

>>12731806
Yeah I don’t think it’s about her GitHub. She literally couldn’t do a for loop while bashing others for being white males

[Anonymous No.12737902]

>>12737690
Ironically people like that are the worst at understanding representation theory. Talking about something via a structure it’s realized in isn’t reductionism. Matrices have associated immediate consequences and intuition as linear operators, so it makes sense to talk about them as matrices if the form is relevant and they aren’t comfortable with pure math.

This is literally dunning kruger “I’m a midwit who wants to flex” bullshit lmao.

[Anonymous No.12737905]

>>12713509
I am Code ape
I code code code
I don’t know shit about graph theory or any fancy comp sci stuff but man I know I can toss vectors at Unity until a game is made.

[Anonymous No.12737967]

>>12728377

if you actually think it would work good luck

~(2&1) = -1
!(2&1) = 1
~(3&1) = -2
!(3&1) = 0

use logical not, not binary

[Anonymous No.12738759]

>>12718816
all of the professors I had in cs classes (4 so far) and all the people I know who study cs do

[Anonymous No.12738767]

>>12728743
kys

[Anonymous No.12738850]

>>12714188
Not his fault.

[Anonymous No.12738885]

>>12713794
ecmascript is all grown up now and is beautiful
>t. remember it’s not 2012 anymore

[Anonymous No.12738896]

>>12733578
retard

[Anonymous No.12738926]

>>12737901
chad ivan

[Anonymous No.12739151]

>>12713254
Wtf, why not just devide by two and square and compare ffs.

Shit like this pisses me off

[Anonymous No.12740531]

>>12730359
I know it's a meme, but is there any actual difference between this and a switch statement besides how it looks?

[Anonymous No.12740550]

Even your brainsa re just finite set array of neurons.

So fuck you, t. applied physicist in technical and computational physics

[Anonymous No.12740556]

>>12739151
>t. dumb cs monkey

[Anonymous No.12740573]

>>12735456
>They were all trained on the job
Nobody with a BS in CS is working on making cryptographic systems. You're either talking out of your ass or think pent testing is "cryptographic work".

[Anonymous No.12740589]

>>12737690
You are wrong retard. Matrices require fixing a basis. Real men work coordinate free.

[Anonymous No.12740599]

>>12740573
What the fuck are you on about? SWE I positions for the cryptosystems team are open at places like amazon, google, Microsoft, etc.. looking for new BS holders to train. It isn’t pentesting either.
You’re the one talking out of your ass. Again, implementing cryptosystems is not the same as making a cryptographic protocol or proving theorems in cryptography. You’re the one talking out of your ass if you think there aren’t BS holders in CS who land these highly sought after entry level jobs.

[Anonymous No.12740604]

>>12740589
See >>12737902
Nobody thinks you’re smarter for working in generality despite trying to explain the point to early undergrads. The whole point to teaching it to other material like engineering is to be able to cleverly choose your basis so everything works out pain free.

[Anonymous No.12740606]

>>12740599
>implementing cryptosystems
Why would they re-invent the wheel when they can just use proven libraries?

[Anonymous No.12740609]

>>12740604
There's a difference retard. They're not the same name for the same thing that "a linear transformation is just a matrix" implies.

[Anonymous No.12740610]

>>12740573
>Nobody with a BS in CS is working on making cryptographic systems.
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/software-development-engineer-aws-cryptography-at-amazon-web-services-aws-2395821826

[Anonymous No.12740619]

>>12740610
>writing software that uses premade libraries to encrypt data
Yeah, monkey work.

[Anonymous No.12740625]

>>12740609
No you dumbfuck, I know the fucking difference. That’s why the post I linked to talked about the representation of a linear transformation, which is different from the abstract linearity in the first place. It’s a miracle representations work in the first place.
But this fact is unimportant in the context of what the engineering student is trying to understand. It’s a point that is true but does nothing to actually demonstrate anything of value.

Kill yourself and bury your head deeper into your algebraic geometry textbook

[Anonymous No.12740627]

>>12740619
>premade libraries
Where does it mention that?
What makes you think they don’t implement libraries that go on AWS?
You’re just repeating points that have been shot down already

[Anonymous No.12740634]

>>12740627
>What makes you think they don’t implement libraries that go on AWS?
Because that would be fucking RETARDED. Literally this >>12714025 pic happens all the fucking time. DO NOT WRITE YOUR OWN LIBRARIES NIGGER. Nor deviate from the instructions like >>12713772

[Anonymous No.12740651]

>>12740634
> Literally this >>12714025 pic happens all the fucking time.
>source: dude just trust me
The two meme pictures are indeed horrible, but nobody is asking to reinvent the wheel in cryptographic work. There's plenty of technology that gets added to libraries as it matures that's directly implemented by the cryptosystems team. You don't have to go through implementing absolutely everything from AES from scratch to do library work that hasn't been done or to do something in a more novel way.

None of what you've said is a real refutation - it's just a cautionary tale because we've decided CS majors are too dumb to do this, despite the process for getting into teams like amazon crypto being as extensive as they are. This isn't even to mention all the work that goes into security on the hardware-software interface and the low level. Amazon's crypto for AWS is clearly more web protocol and thus high level, but one would expect the aforementioned HSM systems to be appropriately low level.

[Anonymous No.12740662]

>>12740651
>but nobody is asking to reinvent the wheel in cryptographic work

>What makes you think they don’t implement libraries that go on AWS?

[Anonymous No.12740674]

>>12740662
>libraries are immutable and API's never change
>the only things in AWS libraries are the classic cryptosystems I've seen in class
>top engineering teams in cryptography don't do high impact, high risk work under good team leads properly before deploying
I'd believe you have a valid point if it were any other field in software except for aircrafts, but cryptography is important enough that the standards are way higher.
I get it, CS majors suck and it's fun to dunk on them, but you're not making any actual point here other than >durr trusting CS majors to keep my secrets safe. They do.

[Anonymous No.12740676]

>>12740674
>>libraries are immutable and API's never change
Monkey work to write wrappers

[Anonymous No.12740695]

>>12740676
>all contribution are all on top of existing AWS libraries
>again, it's so unfathomable that this exclusive team does any nontrivial library work, much less nontrivial work
Nevermind the fact that there's more nontrivial work that isn't building up existing libraries, but I think it's hilarious that you're adamant that somewhere on this crypto team, some elite subset of non-CS grads are The Real Crypto Gang (tm) and everyone else is the monkey. This isn't how any real crytosystem team is organized or even how they work.
But fine, keep laying out the shitposts.

[Anonymous No.12741701]

>>12737902
>>12740589
>stop being so pedantic and shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.12741714]

>>12739151
>square
youd_better_not_be_pretending_to_be_retarded_again.png

[Anonymous No.12741747]

>>12741714
Doing a==(a/n)*n is still retarded to check for nonzero modulo n

[Anonymous No.12741756]

>>12721042
In your head, just replace "set" with "category" or "functor", or try fun alternatives like "untyped lambda calculus term" or "syntax"

[Anonymous No.12741764]

>>12733238
You didn't get 5 words into a post on 4chan before making a mistake. You shouldn't be "role-ing" your own.

[Anonymous No.12741989]

>>12714517
>>12716517
>>12716907
The point of making a deck and drawing two cards is that after drawing two cards, the cards aren't in the deck anymore. You need to at least be able to represent the fact that drawn cards aren't in the deck.

[Anonymous No.12742000]

>>12717685
>only two elements
sounds comfy to me

[Anonymous No.12742093]

>>12720882
>but there must be extra markings to give it a structure of a matrix
not if they're implicit in your code :^)

[Anonymous No.12742143]

>>12741764
>a syntactic error on an underage basket weaving forum means a top crypto team with mature technology, ridiculous amounts of unit testing, years of expertise, etc. are going to make mistakes at any attempt of nontrivial implementation
I agree with the general sentiment of not touching the most sensitive protocols that already work, but you’re dipping into ridiculous amounts of stupidity here. The world of cryptosystem implementation is not divided into muh untouched libraries that muh based not-CS people made and muh wrappers for the library. You’re overfitting the front end software experience to a fundamentally different field in software / mathematics.

[Anonymous No.12742197]

>>12742143
>You’re overfitting the front end software experience to a fundamentally different field in software / mathematics.
That has nothing to do with it. What's the process for finding and correcting errors in your own crypto code? I assume you're not formally proving it correct, but even if you were that's a level of undertaking that will itself require validation.

Using code that has already been widely used allows some small amount of confidence that errors have been found and there are no obvious vulnerabilities. Yes, it's very far from perfect, but what kind of assurances do you have about your own code? None.

[Anonymous No.12742246]

>>12721840
>>12720882
>uhhh lemme dunk on them by bringing in what seems like linear algebra
In mathematics, we choose a fundamental theory of sets, types, etc. to construct other mathematical objects. Each of these constructions has their limitations, but they have enough general utility to express important things.
The same goes for an abstract data types / memory addresses in a computer as idealization of computation on a countably infinite work tape. We construct matrices using sets of field elements that can be referred to by generic variable names like M_{i, j}. In a computer, you can realize this by noticing that M_{i, j} can be expressed an i, j offset from a single memory address.
>but 2-comp approximations aren’t the complete set of the real field
Oh no, approximations that can be used rigorously to give good results have rounding involved, oh no!
>but abstract linearity and vector spaces
Literally all of this still applies using computers. You can use computers to do math. The results we have using FFT and signals and expanders and so on are very nicely behaved computational. Algebra is your best friend in computation, if the loads of Galois theory and cryptography haven’t convinced you already.
>but not every array is a matrix
>waaaah what do you mean I’m being pedantic?
>what do you mean I’m trying to flex my freshman tier knowledge in the most accessible part of pure mathematics out there?

[Anonymous No.12742321]

>>12742197
>What's the process for finding and correcting errors in your own crypto code?
Ridiculous amounts of unit testing. There are formal methods for correctness verification, but it’s not perfect, and we know cryptosystems are tricky because it’s so sensitive.
>what assurances?
See above. You’re acting as though I’m describing a casual push a month to live servers rather than technology that is written carefully but quickly and subjected to huge amount of unit testing in various environments. People don’t touch the original code for say, key generation very often for the reasons you discuss. They don’t change a lot of the classic parts when they don’t need to - that’s very standard engineering practice. But this doesn’t mean they don’t regularly work on protocol and implementation that is both system critical and not yet done. They hire these people to engineer cryptosystems - why are you insisting they don’t engineer cryptosystems?

Nobody here is saying it’s quick, easy, risk free, etc etc. and your team consists of both newer members and senior members for a reason. But these teams don’t stand idle doing nothing but tasks that have been done. They tell you “don’t write your own” as a cautionary tale to not write something that can be extended from an existing black box in a modular way because you’re dipping your toes into something that’s been tested exceptionally many times and works as intended. But just because you aren’t cracking open the old library toys doesn’t mean you don’t get the make your own powerful toys. This is bog standard engineering practice - just because not every EE runs their own backyard silicon process doesn’t mean we can just call the MOSFET a “wrapper for the real electronics work”