First and foremost, I'd say at least 80% of programming jobs require a bachelor's degree, so a university computer science degree is considered vocational training by many.

Second, I consider that a lot of the theory taught at university not being applied more to be a failing both from university academia and the work force.

Too many academics don't parse the subject matter with applications in mind and many employers doesn't give their employees enough leeway to creatively apply what they learned.

It's like being stuck between an autistic savant that just will never get what you want to do and a first grader who doesn't care much about sophistication.

I once worked under a college graduate who didn't go to university and while he was an SQL god, his failure to know about or recognize when to use linked lists puzzled me as I learned about the topic very early on during my studies and consider it one of the simplest data structures.

I refuse to believe that there is no compromise between university and college.

And no, university is not just about picking things up quickly on the workforce. It is also about knowing things that will allow you to come up with solutions that someone else probably won't, because they don't know enough.

I have already applied the theory I learned in university, both in computer science and also in mathematics and statistics quite a lot on my own initiative, both when working for employers and for my own account.

Furthermore, learning how to program and design software well given the countless scenarios you may encounter is not a trivial task and is subject to continuous improvement. Programming methodology and software engineering is a legitimate university topic I find.

Just because it is very applied doesn't mean it is too worldly for sheltered academia.

I consider the schism between academia and the work force to be an unhealthy one and a lot of people that have a foot in both worlds are left out in the process.

Perhaps I just had a bad computer architecture course.

In it, we were taught mostly assembler optimization (this is for someone who hates assembly) and network topologies amongst other things.

It was mandatory for my specialization when I did my degree. Now, it's an optional course for everyone.

TItanium Dioxide
Hydrogenated Oils
Corn Syrup
Wheat Gluten
People
Opinions
Politicians
Bureaucrats
Your Mom
Urine
Chicken Fingers
Cheese Pizza
Picky Eaters
Politically Correct People
Smart Phones
Facebook
Fat People
Smelly People
Uncut Fingernails People
My Wife Driving
Clogged Drains
Wear & Tear
Running out of Q-Tips

This is precisely why academia is not a good place to learn that stuff. Theory actually does provide a lot of grounding and I won't lie, I've spotted problems only because I understood the math behind something, but those things are few and far enough between that they don't overall contribute to the quality of my work, and now I connect the point for the first sentence: Yes, it takes a fuck ton of time and experience to be a really good developer, that's why you do it for years, on the job. Vocational training can give one a jump start and indeed some people desire that, fine that's what it's for. But Computer Science is, when you get right down to it, is an applied mathematics degree that happens to focus on computers. Computer Science does not and never has meant: "Programming". Computer Science existed well before computers, because it's mathematical in nature. That's what Comp Sci is, what it is NOT is vocational training.

The only thing your Comp Sci program should prepare you for is a Masters or PhD. in Comp Sci. That the clever people who take Comp Sci are able to parlay such preparation into a programming job is great, but that has NEVER been the point of Comp Sci and I highly suspect any prof's ability and foundation should they have ever told you it was. And the people who offer you vocational training call it Comp Sci are, quiet frankly, both dishonest and stealing from you.

Funny you should say that as I really love Lipton Yellow Label Tea :-) And I mean love for the taste of it , not just the caffeine. I'm a tea lover too, I just haven't made it into the ranks of those who use tea leaves. Since I'm still satisfied with a few brands of common tea bags I'm going to stick with them until I get tired of them since there likely will be no turning back once I enter the world of tea leaves. Tea bags easy and convenient to handle and they are cheap which is nice since I do drink a lot of tea. I don't like most of the usual types of Twinings and Lipton teas with flavourings like berries and cinnamon. I think they often taste artificial or at best just crap. Twining Green Tea & Lemon however is one of my favorite drinks. The combination of Green Tea and Lemon is so fresh and delicious and is as good when it has gone cold as it is hot, unlike black tea.

Lipton Yellow Label Tea is one of my favourite drinks. It has a very delicious bitter taste that makes it perfect for reading something interesting, offering you insight or stimulating your curiosity, playing strategy games, listening to classical music or to extreme metal. The mind-altering chemicals do play a part too of course :) While the bitter taste of good coffee is very yummy, and a good beer fourfold so, there is something great in black tea that you can't find somewhere else. It is a more subtle taste than coffee or beer, yet there is lot of it to enjoy (I use two bags in a big cup for black tea while only one bag in a normal cup for green tea). An important part of the taste is the tannins. Tannins are great, they add a lot to red wine too, but for some reason some people want to avoid them. When I will make the great leap to non-bagged tea tannins will be one of the things I will taste for.

Until 2006 or 2007 Russian Earl Grey was my favorite black tea but then something either happened to the latest batch or something happened to my sense of taste because since then it hasn't tasted good at all.

I do like a lot of tea that are not tea too. Rooibos tea is usually nice, although it depends on what flavours that have been added of course. In Arab\Asian shops they often have many interesting types of tea and non-tea.

Arrogant people. Liars. Recession. Unemployment. Constant layoffs. Killing sprees. Wars. Suffering. Poverty. Injustice.

Life - and this world - being the arena in which so many billions of people and animals suffered and have suffered.

And my mind for not being able to not think about all the suffering.

Experience is not everything. I've seen my fair share of more experienced programmers who coded like shit.

Enough so that I consider programming methodology to be an important part of university curriculum, especially when you are learning your first programming language.

Let's drill in the good habits from the start.

BTW, maths are important (You don't need to sell that to me, I got a separate degree in mathematics and statistics overall having done more credits in the field than people who go for a specialization in the subject matter), but not everything in computer science revolves around mathematics (at least, not unless you have an extremely louse definition of what mathematics are).

Computer sciences are mathematics and computer sciences, just like mathematics are logic and mathematics.

This is where I think you err.

Turing machines are great and will prove a great many things, but the field of computer sciences has expanded well beyond this (computer graphics, AIs, high level programming languages, software engineering, Operating Systems, networking protocols, the list goes on and on) and much of it warrant it's own academic investigation.

We'll agree to disagree on this.

I think an academic investigation into the subject matter can have great application potential long before the masters' or Phd level.

Fuckin extra terrestrials, you can never really trust them..

Being so easily manipulable.


By some girls.



By some girl.