Itt: technology memes you fell for when you were younger

itt: technology memes you fell for when you were younger
>learning a programming language is just like learning any other language!

all in wonder
my dad still has one in his work computer

>programming isn't math, it's logic

Software is fun, and it's helpful to learn how it works.

>macs don't get viruses

> You need to be good at maths to understand computers.
I am good at maths and understand computers, but I believe you only just need to be in the middle to do that.

So much this.

I fucking suck at maths and I barely passed university calculus on my third and final attempt with the second lowest passing grade, and now I'm doing a PhD in computer science and working together with a company that makes PCIe interconnects for computing clusters.

Correct. Programming is a subset of logic same as math, even though it and math can overlap very much depending on the PL used.

> Algorithms are what is computer science is really about.
I was forced into Pascal by our haunted teacher in middle school. We learned algorithms.
3 years later I learned C/C++ (I didn't even know the difference back then!)
I got to understand pointers another 3 years later, since we didn't use them at all when writing algorithms. Pointers should be taught from the beginning.

What makes it different from human languages anyway?

Thirded, it's enough to be decent. If you are a complete retard at math you probably can't be good enough at logic in general to be able to do programming well. But if you can figure out math at "intermediate level" then there's no general lack of logic ability stopping you from getting good at programming as long as you're wired for it.

Human languages don't flip out and crash when you mispronounce something or you forget a word. Human languages have universal features that everyone can interpret such as laughter and music. You can say half a sentence and most of the time people can understand the other half without you saying it, based on the context.

>uman languages have universal features that everyone can interpret such as laughter and music.
Try to convey laughter and music through written communication then.

But I agree with your last statement, human language processing requires and understanding of context.

I thnk it's just the kind of mindset. I'm a biochemist and my math knowledge is basically high school tier, but I was always very good at it. Guess what you don't need to know how to prove some difficult ass math problems in order to be a good programmer. If you always sucked balls at math you will suck balls at programming too because you just aren't the kind of person who can understand strict systems that aren't subject to interpretation.

>after you turn a PC off, you need to wait at least 1 minute before turning it on again. Otherwise it's bad for the PC
thanks dad for this knowledge, even though I have to remote desktop into your PC if you want to copy photos from the downloads to images folder.

>after unplugging a router, wait a few minutes before plugging it back in
This literally only applies to change a dynamic IP.

Human languages aren't forma yeah. But apart from that, I guess they could be used to write programs just as programming languages. So what makes programming languages so different to learn when in human languages you mostly just need to learn vocabulary and some specific sentence structures? There's something very different about how PLs and human languages work. I think human languages are more about vaguely describing things with "pre-made" words and structures, PLs are about describing things with a very limited language and in a very exact way.

Pointers aren't that hard at basic level, and some basic knowledge of algorithms is indeed pretty important, even though you might get to use it rarely depending on what you program.

formal*

>If you always sucked balls at math you will suck balls at programming too because you just aren't the kind of person who can understand strict systems that aren't subject to interpretation.
That's where you're wrong, though. Mathematics has formal proofs and has rigid rules, and many problems don't even have real-life applications.

Theoretical computer science (logic, algorithm studies etc) have formal proofs etc, but real-life engineering problems require approximative solutions, not formal proofs.

This is why the old as in ancient joke is that if you ask an engineer what value Pi is, he will answer 3.141 because for all intents and purposes, an approximation is more than good enough.

I don't need to know how do prove something using induction in order to understand how disk access is the limiting factor in my program's performance, and that if I want to speed it up I need to reduce disk access.

I *do* need to use induction if I want to prove that my recursive algorithm works for all cases and thus has an upper and lower bound.

Being good at math will be quite helpful, but it is not a catch-all requirement to be good at programming. Structural and logical reasoning in general is much more important.

>learning a programming language is just like learning any other language!

I think it is - it's a mapping in my head between words and their meaning - I learn them both in a pretty similar way

>Arch Linux/Gentoo will teach you Linux

No. Shell scripts, partitioning, networking stuff will teach you.

"lol"

>Mathematics has formal proofs and has rigid rules, and many problems don't even have real-life applications.
>Structural and logical reasoning in general is much more important.
Math isn't all about proofs and ridiculously abstract concepts. There's the high school level math as well, and if you even after seriously trying can't grasp it, I don't think you can have the logical and structural reasoning skills to be such a good programmer

Nice, now do it in sign language and try to convey the difference between laughing a little and laughing a lot.

Also, what about music?

>learning a programming language is just like learning any other language!
True for procedural scripts.
OOP is another thing entirely

"lol" "rofl" "roflmao"
music is verbal though, human languages aren't just composed of text, verbal communication like music is a part of them even if it is difficult to express through writing

Laughter and music aren't really part of human language, the thing you'd find in a book. They're part of communication, but not the language itself. They express experiences, not objective information.

See I got mediocre grades in high school calculus, I barely passed university first year calculus. I did, however, get good grades in discrete mathematics and algorithms and data structures. One of the things preventing me from getting an A in either of those (probably in addition to other things) was that I was unable to prove this or that algorithm with a proof.

My point is, I'm barely able to calculate the area under a curve or find integrals in general, and I would only be able to do that if I could spending a full day or two refreshing my memory and reading up on how to do it again.

I still program good enough, not only to get paid an obscene amount** of money for doing it, I also get paid to do all sorts of esoteric stuff that might not lead to anything at all just because I feel like it and it might turn out to be super useful for the company I collaborate with.

** yes this is an intentional hyperbole and not true if you compare my salary with high-paying jobs

University math can get very tough. Barely passing Calculus 1 sounds worrying though. I'd expect top-tier programmers to be able to do that without problems, depends on the university obviously though.

I gotta give it to you, discrete math and logic is probably partially a different skill from other math. That would explain why you could have problems with "regular" math and still be good at programming. I just really think that somebody doing programming should probably have some basic level of "regular math" ability as well. Yours is probably high enough then?

>Yours is probably high enough then?
Well, when I was still doing classes, I really regretted not being better at maths, because some of the cooler classes (like robotics, and most of the electronics/DSP classes etc) had higher level math courses as prerequisites for taking those classes, and since all I did was the bare minimum, I didn't qualify to take those classes. Which kind of sucked.

Sometimes, when reading papers both in my own field and in related fields, authors with a strong mathematical background tend to use maths to model stuff and explain why their model is correct. Since my math skillset is so limited, I often have to take their word for it. Personally, all my work rely on empirical evidence and building experimental systems that I run a bunch of tests on and then use statistics to show that it actually works. I personally think that actually implementing something is a lot more convincing argument than just modelling your idea, but it means that I also have a lower output rate in terms of publications than others. I have other colleagues at my research institute that churn out papers upon papers, while it takes me half a year to write a decent paper because of it.

So it is definitively a limitation to not have a strong mathematical background. But it is not essential in a way.

Being able to reason logically and inherently understand why algorithm X is better than algorithm Y for this or that use case is an essential skill for programming though. But if you are like me, you get along fine by visualising this using figures and drawings, rather than using maths to show it.

Yeah agreed here. I'm pretty much in the same boat as you in fact, I did "short math" at university, and while I was better than average at it I suppose, at least of the students that weren't hardcore mathheads, I still am not that good at it. Basic calculus, basic geometry, basic probability, basic discrete math I was able to do pretty well, but I was pretty bad/mediocre at the higher-level stuff like trickier differential equations and advanced probability problems.

Also did limit my options on courses.

Yet still I think that I have some basic math ability, much higher than your average joe, just not on the genius level that some programmers and most mathematicians are. I think that somebody who programs is bound to have some math skill like this, not sure how much, but they can't be completely clueless at math. Obviously not being a math genius does still limit your options, but won't stop you from programming.

I think you might be being too humble about your math skills btw, most people here act like hot shit when they can solve a basic induction problem after having just read about it.

Just to add, I can't say I sucked at math, and I was still able to solve some problems I considered pretty hard. I don't think I'm at the bare minimum level of math required for programming, and I'm sure people who are worse at math than me can program fine, probably better than me too.

>advanced math is needed for programming
>not algebra

The worst part is I've even had accusations of lying against me for saying it isn't.
I've literally not done direct numeral math in programming from fucking 9. (30 now)
It is all algebra!
The computer does that shit for me. I don't care about the numbers. I only care about the operation orders.

If I wanted to do maths, I'd have went in to CompSci or related sub-field. (which I nearly did, but eh)
Or Physics. I liked physics. Still got the uni book from my lecturer that I accidentally forgot I had. (paid for it though, not going to be a dick and lose the guys book)

Well, you might have a point about being too humble. If I compare myself with average joe as in Joe who did a master's degree in political science, then of course my math skills are above his. But to the average among my peers, I think I am below.

And you are definitively right about Sup Forums acting like hot shit for the smallest accomplishments, I think the Dunning-Kreuger effect is clearly visible on this board. People who are very knowledgable get insecure and tend to moderate their answers when they are met with outright hostile arrogance from people who just discovered that there is something called X.

>don't ever use your first name on the internet

for a long time I thought Linux is an operating system, thanks to Sup Forums now I know better

May I interject...