Just remember that CS is a means, not an end! (Imagine an ancient Mesopotamian scribe telling you writing is the ultimate and all else is subordinate.)
For the typical programmer, maybe. But that is like saying mathematics is a means, not an end. Which is true, but that does not mean there is no value in studying and advancing the field of mathematics!
That's going to be true for any technical discipline. The majority of any engineering or maths curriculum is available on Wikipedia and mathworld in great detail.
Why CS is different is due to less of a need of verification of skill. Many don't mind giving an informally taught programmer a job because his/her work can be verified by reading or executing code. That isn't possible in civil engineering, for example.
>The majority of any engineering or maths curriculum is available on Wikipedia and mathworld in great detail.
I'd love to believe that someone could do this, but I haven't seen it happen. Most of the course-like learning I've been able to do "online" has been because some professor was nice enough to put a pdf of their textbook on their university page.
That said, I've created a subreddit specifically for people who want to read long articles that teach them something important. http://www.reddit.com/r/learnit/
Sorry, but which topics in particular do you find lacking on Wikipedia or mathworld, for example?
The math and physics articles are generally pretty good, include derivations, background on the subject, and you can then click to learn about the personalities who discovered the idea. There are no problem sets, however.
This is one problem, the other problem is that there isn't a good way to sort the articles by prerequisites. There's also no easy way find out what you don't know you don't know about a subject.
There's is a distinction between a professional skill like programming and an artistic skill like painting, which could perhaps be expressed through demand levels and commoditization.
Programming is easier to commoditize than painting. Painting ceased being a professional skill in relatively high demand upon the advent of the camera. The individuality of the painter became even more important during impressionism.
I would say that in creating something one's skills are almost irrelevant. Does it matter the skill of the creator if the art is beautiful or the application just works?
I think a lot of things are self-taught by nine-year-olds: the basics of engineering (I know a nine year old who built a potato gun!), sports, arts and crafts, networking, animal care, and these are just the things off the top of my head :)
Comments
Just remember that CS is a means, not an end! (Imagine an ancient Mesopotamian scribe telling you writing is the ultimate and all else is subordinate.)
Domain knowledge! Get some!
For the typical programmer, maybe. But that is like saying mathematics is a means, not an end. Which is true, but that does not mean there is no value in studying and advancing the field of mathematics!
That's going to be true for any technical discipline. The majority of any engineering or maths curriculum is available on Wikipedia and mathworld in great detail.
Why CS is different is due to less of a need of verification of skill. Many don't mind giving an informally taught programmer a job because his/her work can be verified by reading or executing code. That isn't possible in civil engineering, for example.
>The majority of any engineering or maths curriculum is available on Wikipedia and mathworld in great detail.
I'd love to believe that someone could do this, but I haven't seen it happen. Most of the course-like learning I've been able to do "online" has been because some professor was nice enough to put a pdf of their textbook on their university page.
That said, I've created a subreddit specifically for people who want to read long articles that teach them something important. http://www.reddit.com/r/learnit/
Sorry, but which topics in particular do you find lacking on Wikipedia or mathworld, for example?
The math and physics articles are generally pretty good, include derivations, background on the subject, and you can then click to learn about the personalities who discovered the idea. There are no problem sets, however.
>There are no problem sets, however.
This is one problem, the other problem is that there isn't a good way to sort the articles by prerequisites. There's also no easy way find out what you don't know you don't know about a subject.
My god, thanks for that, I found this link: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2006/04/how-to-get-up-right... ...it could be the solution to a major problem of mine!
Exactly. This is also why programming is the only adult professional skill which is regularly self-taught by, say, nine-year-olds.
What about painting? Or any art form?
Most 9 year olds don't know about chiaroscuro in the same way most 9 year old programmers don't know about compiler theory.
I think at the undergraduate level a lot of what they teach won't get you hired if you know it but will get you fired if it turns out you don't.
There's is a distinction between a professional skill like programming and an artistic skill like painting, which could perhaps be expressed through demand levels and commoditization.
Programming is easier to commoditize than painting. Painting ceased being a professional skill in relatively high demand upon the advent of the camera. The individuality of the painter became even more important during impressionism.
I would say that in creating something one's skills are almost irrelevant. Does it matter the skill of the creator if the art is beautiful or the application just works?
Hmm, good point. Painting is, likewise, a field where it's easy to try new things and figure out on your own whether they work or not.
I think a lot of things are self-taught by nine-year-olds: the basics of engineering (I know a nine year old who built a potato gun!), sports, arts and crafts, networking, animal care, and these are just the things off the top of my head :)