- Lots of reference to military applications
- Nuclear reactors and shielding
- FORTRAN!
An interesting note about the applications on the nuclear side: I worked in a semi-high security clearance environment on certain nuclear operations. One item we dealt with in particular was a very old algorithm implemented in FORTRAN. We were attempting to scale the system involved, and the implementation of the algorithm was a major bottleneck.
The algorithm was phenomenally complex (it's nuclear science, after all). And, we had a challenge in documentation that was impossible to clear up with the original algorithm implementors: most of the team involved had passed away more than a decade earlier.
It was one of the neatest programming challenges I've ever encountered. Those old-school engineers were cool, and I wish our industry could keep more of those people around to pass along what they learned and help teach our industry going forward. The technologies may change, but logic never goes out-of-date.
What I noticed is how many references there were to wanting mathematicians to learn to code. It's weird because it's a good idea and I don't see that in job ads any more.
Anecdotally, most computer scientists I know (excluding undergrads... I'm talking about PhDs, graduate and professional academic researchers etc.) don't write code and do a fairly poor job when they try.
You might be surprised at how many of us didn't go into CS proper, but can still code. My degree was CMS and I still have to explain what it consists of all the time.
Given how I'm in the field, I've met several, so, no, I'm not surprised. Just because mathematics then, and CS today, is the obvious path into the field, that doesn't make it the only one.
Perhaps computer science wasn't widespread as formal area of study in universities at the time, so people were looking for the next best candidate, who is someone good at physics and math?
[edit to explain that gut reaction]
Physics and math practitioners would be far better candidates than a general computer scientist, for the domains described in this ad, even today.
Comments
A few observations:
An interesting note about the applications on the nuclear side: I worked in a semi-high security clearance environment on certain nuclear operations. One item we dealt with in particular was a very old algorithm implemented in FORTRAN. We were attempting to scale the system involved, and the implementation of the algorithm was a major bottleneck.The algorithm was phenomenally complex (it's nuclear science, after all). And, we had a challenge in documentation that was impossible to clear up with the original algorithm implementors: most of the team involved had passed away more than a decade earlier.
It was one of the neatest programming challenges I've ever encountered. Those old-school engineers were cool, and I wish our industry could keep more of those people around to pass along what they learned and help teach our industry going forward. The technologies may change, but logic never goes out-of-date.
What I noticed is how many references there were to wanting mathematicians to learn to code. It's weird because it's a good idea and I don't see that in job ads any more.
Yes you do. The branching out just happens already at university. The coding mathematicians are known as computer scientists.
Anecdotally, most computer scientists I know (excluding undergrads... I'm talking about PhDs, graduate and professional academic researchers etc.) don't write code and do a fairly poor job when they try.
Sure, but certainly they had the same problems in 1959. My point was that CS is a branch of Mathematics.
You might be surprised at how many of us didn't go into CS proper, but can still code. My degree was CMS and I still have to explain what it consists of all the time.
Given how I'm in the field, I've met several, so, no, I'm not surprised. Just because mathematics then, and CS today, is the obvious path into the field, that doesn't make it the only one.
I didn't really mean you specifically, but a lot of the people I've met lately seem to think that way.
Perhaps computer science wasn't widespread as formal area of study in universities at the time, so people were looking for the next best candidate, who is someone good at physics and math?
Lol "the next best candidate". C'mon.
[edit to explain that gut reaction] Physics and math practitioners would be far better candidates than a general computer scientist, for the domains described in this ad, even today.
The first comp sci degree in the US wasn't offered until 1962 (though cambridge com. lab had coined it in 1953)