Watson is, fundamentally, no different from that rock. Sure, it follows a very complex "path" indeed (though laid down by humans), but the only difference between the rock and Watson is the *kind* of path. In fact, Watson's path is less complex than the path of the rock (which isn't entirely a fair comparison, since the rock's path is practically infinitely complex)
It seems that you are assuming Watson is as deterministic (if not more) as the act of rock throwing. It is not. Watson is a lot more heuristic than algorithmic. We are only scratching the surface of what neural networks can do, and many times we do not understand why they behave the way they do. And we built them.
If all you wanna do is code, then you don't need a computer science degree. There are plenty of companies looking for people to do form plumbing.
Now, if you wanna do real computer science, yes you will need a degree. By real computer science I mean things like improving performance using algorithm complexity analysis (Big O), knowing when to utilize the best data structures, architectural optimizations, AI, writing your own lexers and parsers - the list is endless.
Computer science is different than coding. Whereas coding is a tool, computer science is the study of any kind of computation. You can implement a quicksort algorithm on C++ or while sorting your own clothes in the closet. Both are computer science.
You just have to stuff enough mass in one place to overflow the mass counter!
The US and McDonalds are actively working on that proof.
As said in TFA, engineers usually don't want to "move up" in the company, but my experience tells me that a good portion of us day dream about making an app that will make them millionaires. For me, that is a inherent sense of entrepreneurship.
Simply put: why are you going to take in more responsibility to enrich someone else while you can work on your own projects during your spare time and hit the jackpot?
Of course, that mindset might not be realistic: the cruel reality is that most of us will never become millionaires. But if corporations were willing to change the "take this fixed amount of money and I'll try the hardest I can to suck the life out of you" to "you and your team own this project, and your compensation will contain part of that project's profits", then maybe more engineers would be willing to manage.
That's why we need more people using languages like this: http://haxe.org/
I discovered it a couple of months ago. It has its quirks, but not having to worry about rewriting your entire app for another platform is a blessing. And no messy VMs needed.
The magnitude of many of the units comprising the SI system of measurement, including most of those used in the measurement of electricity and light, are highly dependent upon the stability of a 135-year-old, golf ball-size cylinder of metal stored in a vault in France.
You know, I like C# and Visual Studio - if I could easily write code that would run across not just all the Windows platforms, but Android and IOS too - and with a UI that looks native on each platform, like QT does - that would be a wonderful thing.
Recently I fell in love with this, which seems to do exactly what you describe: haxe
The consistent UI seems to be the only thing missing; everything else is there.
Yes, just dump more money into it, and see it vanish into the pockets of those who are in power while they build a clinic that costs as much as three hospitals. And one year later, even that will start to fall apart, because the dictator's/president's/king's yacht has priority over the budget.
Poverty is not an economic/health issue, it is a cultural one. If you don't change how the people and their leaders think, countries will remain poor.
I came from a poor country, and lived there for 23 years. Enough time to see how things truly work.
I spend at least 8 to 10 hours at work staring at a screen every day. Then, I come home to stare at another big screen for a couple of hours. The last thing I want to do is to stare at yet another screen to fall asleep.
E-readers are nice, up to a certain point. Contrast is still too low for my particular taste. I had a kindle for about an year, until I unconsciously would reach for printed books because it was just more pleasurable to read without having to fiddle with font sizes to compensate for the lack of contrast. Flashing page turns also broke my immersion.
But again, I am 26 - maybe I'm just too old to get into the e-book scene.
Before Xerox, five carbons were the maximum extension of anybody's ego.