Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: ignorance is bliss... (Score 1) 323

Well, if it is on Wikipedia it must be true. Such a great defense to your argument!

You can build an industry around anything. It still doesn't make it a science.

In the meantime some may wait for you to actually "discover" an algorithm. Perhaps some will call this activity "angel'o'sphere's folly".

Comment: Re:engineering is applied science (Score 1) 323

Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying something doesn't make it so.
Perhaps you need to study a bit more philosophy. So-called computer science is a philosophy based on arbitrary foundations and assumptions.

Let's look at how you are asserting the opposite:
First, are algorithms invented or discovered? Algorithms can only be invented. When someone "discovers" an algorithm, where was it hiding? What form does it have? Quite simply, algorithms have no physical form so they cannot be discovered.

Second, somehow you feel that simply asserting that developing a "software system" proves that it is engineering. Quite simply, it isn't.
Since you mentioned clay---software is not at all like clay. Software does not have physical form beyond the system that was arbitrarily develop to record some aspects of it. If it does, how would you describe it?

Finally, "give me three statements about bubble sort and three about quick sort...without CS you could not do that". What does that prove aside from that people can write things about anything? If I write a tome about pixies does that make pixies a science? Certainly not!

Le'ts put this in terms you may be able to understand.
Computer "science" is an applied philosophy. In this way it is a great deal like mathematics and very unlike physics.

Comment: engineering is applied science (Score 1) 323

Engineering is applied science. Electrical engineering, chemical engineering, and running a train are true engineering pursuits.
Computer "science" is not a science---it is an arbitrary paradigm beyond the electrical engineering and physics required to construct physical computers.
Since there is no "science" in computer science, calling a programmer an "engineer" makes no sense.

Any given program will expand to fill available memory.