No one is claiming that computer science is a branch of mathematics,

I would claim that is it a subset or specialization of mathematics.

[quote name='slayemin' timestamp='1348759352' post='4984378']
The subject of "computer science" is "Doing science with computers",

Actually I would describe it as the "science of computation" is which a bit different than what you proposed.
[/quote]

Yeah, you're exactly right. I was doubting my definition after I posted it and had to look it up on wikipedia. I stand corrected

They're looking for programmers that show promise

Experts are very promising.

And just because there exist privileged people who create their own bad situation, doesn't mean that all people who aren't in jobs they enjoy come from privileged backgrounds.

If they were truly priviledged, the fact that they're unemployed would be largely irrelevant.

Software engineering has more to do with business requirements than it does with mathematics.

Ahem... These two majors are not the same. Computer Science is about as some say "computation". Logic is a whole school under the major Math also one of them is called Boolean. It is really wrong that people keep on saying Software engineering and computer science in one sentence as they were one and the same thing. I wonder why many get a big surprise as a freshmen in CS....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_science

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering

They are related but still their goals are often not the same.

It is really wrong that people keep on saying Software engineering and computer science in one sentence as they were one and the same thing.

They are at best different facets of the same discipline. Hell, they are usually taught in the same department, by the same professors. What is the benefit to artificially demarcating them?

A computer scientist with no knowledge of software engineering is just as useless as a software engineer with no knowledge of computer science.

[quote name='Dwarf King' timestamp='1348762094' post='4984395']
It is really wrong that people keep on saying Software engineering and computer science in one sentence as they were one and the same thing.

They are at best different facets of the same discipline. Hell, they are usually taught in the same department, by the same professors. What is the benefit to artificially demarcating them?

A computer scientist with no knowledge of software engineering is just as useless as a software engineer with no knowledge of computer science.
[/quote]

I'm afraid that this seems completely crazy to me. I mean, why would a complexity theorist want, much less need, to know anything about software engineering? I'm not saying it's bad for people to have knowledge of different subjects, but computer science and software engineering seem to be related extremely superficially. I mean, they're much less related then, say, logic and mathematics, which you seem to treat as different. I don't think the demarcation is artificial at all; in fact, I think the evidence strongly favors the relationship between the two being the only artificial thing.

why would a complexity theorist want, much less need, to know anything about software engineering?

Ah. I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. I couldn't care less about ivory-tower academics (how many pure complexity theorists do you work with?).

When we are developing software in the real world, we need software engineering and computer science side-by-side (usually, both performed by the same developer).

[quote name='cowsarenotevil' timestamp='1348771031' post='4984445']
why would a complexity theorist want, much less need, to know anything about software engineering?

Ah. I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. I couldn't care less about ivory-tower academics (how many pure complexity theorists do you work with?).

When we are developing software in the real world, we need software engineering and computer science side-by-side (usually, both performed by the same developer).
[/quote]

That's sort of the point, though. You don't care because it's not the same field. Software developers make use of theoretical results, both directly and indirectly, but they typically don't do the kind of theoretical work that wins Turing awards and stuff; this is exactly why you don't care about them, presumably. On the other hand, the theoreticians, that is people who are only computer scientists, have little reason to know about software engineering. I absolutely am not convinced that knowing both is vital (as you seemed to claim earlier) or even necessarily good, except in the general sense of "hey, I know two different but sort of related things!"

My point, again, is that computer science and software engineering are not the same thing, and the former generally has a lot more to do with mathematics than the latter.

I absolutely am not convinced that knowing both is vital (as you seemed to claim earlier) or even necessarily good, except in the general sense of "hey, I know two different but sort of related things!"

I wouldn't want to work with a Software engineer who knew nothing of computer science, or vice versa. I'm also not sure that I've ever met such a person, even in the ivory towers of academia.

I'm sure there are some purely theoretical computer science researchers out there, but my guess would be they describe themselves as mathematicians. Because if you remove all the parts of computer science that actually apply to writing software, you are left with mathematics...

I think a lot of people honestly don't understand the concept of doing something solely because they love it. Most likely, this is because things are rarely sold to people as something they'll love. I mean, anytime I see articles about "What major should I pick?" the subject that is given the highest priority is the average annual salary earned by those who hold a given degree. When a kid complains about school, parents justify dealing with it by saying "You need to go to school and get good grades." Why? "So you can go to a good college." Why? "So you can get a good job." That's it. That's the end goal. Most people aren't ever challenged to really think beyond that. Get a good job, and the credits roll.

In that kind of world, passionate people are also called "stupid". We're lucky, as people interested in technology. This field happens to be where all the money is at, and so people see passionate technologists and think "Oh that guy made the right choice. He's gonna make double my salary." But they don't see that the actual love of technology is the single most important driving factor. On the other hand, someone who is very passionate about, say, art, is considered a complete idiot. You get an Art History degree, and you're the butt of every "doomed to failure" joke. Why? No jobs there. All anyone cares about is the money.

What these people are really missing, though, is the fact that if the same person who is passionate about programming were to one day wake up and realize "Oh my god... I want to be an artist," they'd drop everything and go right into art. They'd be an Art/Art History major. They'd spend all day painting, sketching, drawing and studying the craft. I think most people have never experienced passion, and so they don't understand how much raw power it has, or how much more fulfilling it is than some sort of likelihood of "success" you earn by getting good grades and picking a good major.