3
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)
FreeAssembly
87 readers
2 users here now
this is FreeAssembly, a non-toxic design, programming, and art collective. post your share-alike (CC SA, GPL, BSD, or similar) projects here! collaboration is welcome, and mutual education is too.
in brief, this community is the awful.systems answer to Hacker News. read this article for a solid summary of why having a less toxic collaborative community is important from a technical standpoint in addition to a social one.
some posting guidelines apply in addition to the typical awful.systems stuff:
- all types of passion projects and contributions are welcome, including and especially those that aren't programming or engineering in nature
- this is an explicitly noncommercial, share-alike space
- don't force yourself to do work you don't enjoy, or demand it of others
(logo credit, with modifications by @dgerard@awful.systems)
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
It didn't read to me like she was a fan of this shit at all, but was despairing of it and looking for ways to teach actual competence despite it
I'm probably projecting a baggage of dozens of conversations with people that unironically argue that a CS university should prepare you for working in industry as a programmer, but that's because I can't really discern the author's perspective on this from the text.
In either case,
I think my point is that "competent programmer" as viewed by the industry is a vastly different thing than a "competent computer scientist" in a philosophical sense. Computer science really struggles with this because many things require both being a good engineer and a good scientist? For an analogy, an electric engineer and a physicist specialising in electrical circuits are two vastly different professions, and you don't need to know what an electron is to do the first. Whereas in computer science, like, you can't build a compiler without knowing your shit both around software engineering and theoretical concepts.
Let me also add that I think I never wrote a post where I would more like people to come and disagree with me. I might be very well talking some bullshit based on my vibes here, since all of this is basically vibes from mingling around with both industry and academia people...
If you keep in the mind the original angst of the students “I have to learn how to use LLMs or I’ll get left behind” they themselves have a vocational understanding of their degree. And it is sensible to address those concerns practically (though as stated in another comment, I don’t believe in accepting the default use of generative tools).
On a more philosophical note I think STEM fields (and any really general well-rounded education) would benefit from delving (!) deeper in library science/archival science/philosophy and their application to history, and that coincidentally that would make a lot of people better at troubleshooting and legacy code untangling.
Ooh, would you say more about this? I have opinions, but that’s because I’m a programmer now but formerly a librarian & archivist (on the digital side, it’s more common to go back and forth between them; it’s the same degree).