Any sort of drawing on the screen requires math. Even such simple task as drawing a circle is daunting without knowledge of trigonometry and algebra. In general, any sort of useful software is a mathematical model of some process.

Some people fear math too much. Yes, it requires work to master, but it can be done by anyone. I don't believe that there is such thing as 'brilliance'. People just have different priorities and learn different things. As far as things like programming are concerned learning underlying theory(in this case mathematics) will save you time, because without it you'll end up reinventing things that were already discovered in middle ages.

No they aren't. Using word 'property' in this case is misnomer. Patent a temporary state granted monopoly. You can't steal a monopoly. Only encroach on it.

Like chrony.

I wouldn't recommend openntpd because it isn't an implementation of ntp

MIDI encodes music in terms of instruments. All other mainstream sound formats encode sound waves, but there's no good way to detect instruments in sound waves. Only MIDI can be actually practical if you want something instrument-aware.

Let's just say extension of type system is the only aspect of OOP I took as something significant and rejected everything else as either individual style preferences or intellectual masturbation.

Design patterns themselves transcend language features. That was my only point here. Mixing those two is a mistake. Using a language feature doesn't automatically make you proficient in using design pattern it's associated with. It's merely a syntactic sugar. And many language features serve different design patterns. And those patterns are implemented with different features in different languages.

There's no such thing as 'OOP-oriented design'. Just some common design (anti-)patterns that people associate with object-oriented language features. Object-orientation is nothing more and nothing less than the capability to extend the type system. Looking for deeper philosophy in it is a waste of time.

Don't forget C# too. Just try to write a self-contained program in it that doesn't involve at least 1 class :P

'Object oriented' just means that you can extend the type system of the language which is completely orthogonal to procedural programming. It doesn't matter if you use only base types in your sub-routines, or add some custom types made with oop. So those approaches aren't even mutually exclusive. Just some common language constructs, which some languages implement and some don't.

Just do another Great Schism then. The more warring religious factions are around the sooner all people will realize that religions are just childish wishful thinking and abandon them fully.

Notice how proportion of men grows with target age category. I'd say it reflects some widespread notion of gender roles. Like only women should educate kiddies. I bet kindergarten/high school teacher doesn't get paid as well as college professor either..

But purely theoretic discipline shouldn't include word 'computer' since it's actual physical device. Design of actual physical devices is domain of engineering. That's why I think it's awkward. Theoretical part is covered by disciplines like informatics, cybernetics and algorithmic complexity theory. I'm not sure if we even need an umbrella term for them. Many other disciplines are used in design of computing devices, those that I named appeared in response to demands of design of computing devices historically, there's nothing else special about them.

Entire field is a bit young and I always thought that 'computer science' is a bit awkward term. But IME everyone agrees that it's study of algorithms and their implementation in computing devices. It's basically applied math.

Not essential anymore. All major game engines tend to have opengl codepaths and even full linux ports.