I don't think that it's primarily about jobs. At this rate, CS is going to be the first field to be "solved." By 2030 we'll probably know whether P=NP (like many others, I'm starting to suspect that it does,) and just about every other open problem shall fall, so everything that seemed important to us from first principles will be known.
> CS is going to be the first field to be "solved."
With due respect, your statement reflects a lack of experience building production software. In real-world software systems, code is only one aspect. Automation helps, but "what needs to be built" is a harder problem and remains a human endeavor.
To be pedantic about it, CS =/= software engineering. CS is a scientific field that's more closely related to math or analytic philosophy. It concerns itself with what is computationally possible and tractable, algorithm design principles, and information theory.
The scientific field doesn't have that many open problems -- whether P=NP is the greatest and most famous -- and they're set to fall like dominoes. A condition where CS is "solved" and has no major open problems is a very real near-term possibility, and probably a medium-term inevitability.
Though software engineering is a fundamentally different discipline, none of this implies that software development isn't in trouble. Human planners and software architects might remain, but very soon LLMs are going to write virtually all code.
> CS is going to be the first field to be "solved."
It seems to me that such a prediction can only be made based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose and meaning of the field. It's not only about "computers" or "science". And "solving" may not even be the most important aspect of it. Same with mathematics.
It's like saying, we will solve algorithmic thinking, or we will figure out the machine to end all machines. OK, getting closer..
Or that we will make the ultimate tele/microscope that sees everything, the entirety the universe, all 93 billion light-years of it down to the Planck scale. Or that we will fully understand the human mind, all 1.3 kilograms of grey matter. The mystery is not only about the "brain", although it likes to think of itself as the quintessence of existence. And logical thinking may not even be the most important aspect of it. Same with art, biology, music, or theology.
Finally, it's like saying, science will "solve" solving in the next few years. As we get closer, we will find that there will be more and more questions, a seemingly infinite well-spring of answers. Perhaps in the end, the universe will understand itself, and God will awaken. What room then, for humanity?
Im 40 years old and in my time on earth theres only a few things Im still certain of - and one of them is every time a new bit of knowledge is discovered it creates 2 more questions.
Even in good times, CS was poorly matched with the jobs people got the degree for. People put up with the BS because there was gold at the end of the rainbow.
This is true. I loved my time doing Compsci in university and I feel I was probably more suited to doing that for career, but software jobs were plentiful and I still don't know where I would find a computer science job aside from a university
Is this a terminology difference? Where I am, most computer science people are getting software jobs, and they're considered to be computer science jobs. So, I find this remark confusing.
Some CS departments are known to be "theory" heavy whereas others are more "applied" heavy. In theory heavy departments many students do not get exposed to the day-to-day details of writing perfomant code and they have the feel of being an offshoot of the math department as opposed to engineering.
That's one of those decades-long debates that continues. Is CS actually "science"? Are developers actually "engineers"? Is a person in charge of a Kanban board an "architect"?
There are absolutely computer science jobs, but in general, a casual distinction would be what side of the research/implement line you fall (though in truth, it's probably more of a 2D graph than a hard line).
15 comments
[ 0.18 ms ] story [ 26.1 ms ] thread> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_c...
Then advances in algorithmic efficacy will be the province of machines, who will act in ways and at speeds that are beyond human.
What room, then, for CS students?
I wonder if biology and theology are picking up students. Those fields, I'd bet, won't be solved within our lifetimes.
With due respect, your statement reflects a lack of experience building production software. In real-world software systems, code is only one aspect. Automation helps, but "what needs to be built" is a harder problem and remains a human endeavor.
The scientific field doesn't have that many open problems -- whether P=NP is the greatest and most famous -- and they're set to fall like dominoes. A condition where CS is "solved" and has no major open problems is a very real near-term possibility, and probably a medium-term inevitability.
Though software engineering is a fundamentally different discipline, none of this implies that software development isn't in trouble. Human planners and software architects might remain, but very soon LLMs are going to write virtually all code.
It seems to me that such a prediction can only be made based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose and meaning of the field. It's not only about "computers" or "science". And "solving" may not even be the most important aspect of it. Same with mathematics.
It's like saying, we will solve algorithmic thinking, or we will figure out the machine to end all machines. OK, getting closer..
Or that we will make the ultimate tele/microscope that sees everything, the entirety the universe, all 93 billion light-years of it down to the Planck scale. Or that we will fully understand the human mind, all 1.3 kilograms of grey matter. The mystery is not only about the "brain", although it likes to think of itself as the quintessence of existence. And logical thinking may not even be the most important aspect of it. Same with art, biology, music, or theology.
Finally, it's like saying, science will "solve" solving in the next few years. As we get closer, we will find that there will be more and more questions, a seemingly infinite well-spring of answers. Perhaps in the end, the universe will understand itself, and God will awaken. What room then, for humanity?
There are absolutely computer science jobs, but in general, a casual distinction would be what side of the research/implement line you fall (though in truth, it's probably more of a 2D graph than a hard line).