Have to take all sorts of useless math to major in CS

>have to take all sorts of useless math to major in CS
Why did I fall for this meme?

>Computer Science
>The science of computation
Also
>CS math is useless and/or hard

I like math, it's the sociology, native people's history etc that I can't stand.

Mathematical models translated into computer programs is a staple of actual systems.

Ignore all of the mathematical ideologues who argue that math is some transcendent window into God's mind.

It is a language for describing things that can be counted. Treat it like a language and you'll do fine.

why do Ameribraps hate math so much? its unambiguous description of things clears your head and brings you joy

As someone who has a BS; most math I've used is stats. The calc has most definitely proven to be useless.

Switch to Information Systems, brainlet

>be brainlet
>dislike math because you suck at it
Sucks being you

Stop being a little bitch and learn math you faggot

>why do Ameribraps hate math so much
Because in our school it is useless and they never show you how to apply it in real life.

Lets say you are fresh out from getting a 4 year degree.
Can you solve a quadratic formula? Probably
What is a quadratic formula for? Ask literally any college graduate, they don't know.
Can you invest in the stock market and calculate risk to a reasonable degree? Hahahaha good fucking luck, you'll be investing in asscoins by tomorrow and posting pink wojacks the day after that

If you take math all the way up to Calculus III, you will still have to unlearn half of the shit that you know and then relearn it right again just to become a programmer who actually uses advanced mathematics, it's mostly because math teachers can only read from a fucking book and have no idea why they are teaching what they are teaching or what any of the shit actually does in real life.

It's just useless information without context, no one uses it so no one remembers it and they hate doing it because for all intents and purposes it is pointless.

>applied mathematics
Just kys
t.math student

I apply mathmetics every day you memelord.

When's the last time you used a quadratic formula?
When's the last time you filed your taxes?
What math skills do you need to calculate interest on a mortgage?

And don't forget that both answers are equally correct.

I just did IT which was just software development, networking, databases and project management

so you are a code monkey
you was speaking like learning maths should be using maths applied to real life. If you can't figure out from yourself how math is used in real life and that you need to go to school to figure that you are a brainlet.

Math must be applicable to real life, otherwise it is useless information. Prove me wrong.

Oh wait, you can't, you can barely even speak English you fucking plebian.

>t. brainlet

number theory was 'useless information not applicable to real life' until computers came around and now the entire basis of encryption relies on the concept of modular arithmetic, modular inverses, and the difficulty of prime factorization of the product two very large primes

Your fucking problem, is that like many retards, you do CS when what you really want is to be a fucking code monkey, or a software engineer at most, for which you don't really need math.
CS IS MATH, practically a superset of it.
If companies hire computer scientists to do the job a software engineer (like programming enterprise applications or apps in Java, C#, Ruby, etc) is not the fault of the CS degree, the problem is that the companies that are full of retards that don't know what a CS degree actually is.
Just do SE or IT and shut the fuck up.

absolutely this.
CS is the study of information in relation to computers, and all of this information is always stored, modeled, worked with mathematically.
programming is NOT CS, programming is simply a tool in a computer scientists tool belt.

>Yes, diversified agriculture major, you NEED to learn ancient Egyptian algebra
>It may be useless now but MAYBE ONE DAY we might use it for something
>Well...not you, but SOMEONE might!
So you're saying it was useless until it wasn't, and even then only to a very specialized group of people? how is that proving anything?

You're a fucking retard, do you seriously expect your average chucklefuck nursing major to knowingly use encryption as part of their job? No, they won't. And they also wont be using modular inverses and prime factorization, and yet they still learn the shit anyway, and it's useless.

>but they will use it!
Go ask any nurse what encryption is, I fucking dare you.

Use your brain "math student", you sound like a retarded freshman.

This I can agree with, this is a prime issue of morons hearing "Computer Science" and instantly thinking "Computer, that's what we want", meanwhile they have no idea what Computer Science actually is because they are usually just a bunch of stupid slags in HR who have a degree in underwater poetry.

>have to take all of this CS to finish major in maths
Feels good man.

fire was useless until people learned how to cook with it, retard.
number theory was useless until it let you log into you bank account online without somebody withdrawing all your funds every time you do so
>You're a fucking retard, do you seriously expect your average chucklefuck nursing major to knowingly use encryption as part of their job?
yes they do, at least in america, dipshit. health records need to be protected by law. they are generally encrypted.
your literally making the argument that because a painter doesnt need to read they should never become literate.
i bet your american, because you sound stupid.
>Go ask any nurse what encryption is, I fucking dare you.
i bet they could give a fairly accurate high-level description.

>we should not learn things, learning things is stupid

>tfw reading sicp
>tfw using all that delicious and fun math in the first chapter

fuck, if all computer science is this based, i'm in

>health records need to be protected by law. they are generally encrypted.
Yea, I'm sure the nurses are the ones who set all that up

>a painter doesn't need to read they should never become literate.
Except a painter actually does need to read, literacy is common knowledge and paint cans have labels dipshit.

>i bet they could give a fairly accurate high-level description.
Burden of proof is now on you.

By the way, when are you gonna go to those gender studies classes? Never know when you might be the next Bono! Also, don't forget that you also need to take literally every other class at the university because you just never know when you might need that information!

>tracing professor's notes

never took a class that was like this. did this after a precalc class as a way to not have to do an induction proof on that style of problem.
the theorem basically shows that two numbers are always evenly divisible by another number when those two numbers have the same remainder when divided by the dividing number. those numbers can be raised to any power and it remains true.
Some people actually enjoy doing math proofs.

Explain why you would need math to not be a code monkey

although, thanks for the compliment, i was rather proud of this proof myself. i proved it biconditionally, just dont have a picture of the proof of the converse handy to post

You won't, at least not at the level that they require. Even the best code monkeys barely go past college algebra tier math in implementation, he's just sniffing his own farts because he thinks he's Ian Malcom.

...

>thinks he's Ian Malcom

Look into my eyes.

We math students now.

i have no image which accurately expresses the level of anger your image evokes within me

Can someone explain to me what the point of this is?
If it got through the whole "chain of command" of education, and its allowed, then there must be some value to it.

...

>Can someone explain to me what the point of this is
im not sure, i dont understand the order of operations either.
but surely when you have a simple expression like this involving only integers and basic operations it makes sense that there would be two correct answers, maybe more

Why would it ever be 1? PEMDAS:
2(2)
20/5
4(4)
16

Yes, that answer is also correct.

Allen? Is that you?

Linear algebra is 100% essential for computer science

hahaha holy shit

the statement fails when a = 1, b = -1 and n = 2. Also for a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6. I haven't read through the argument but you've slipped up somewhere

The point of it is to let retards pass.

Congrats math majors, your field is about to go straight down the shitter in about 5 more years.

Your gonna be dealing with these "math" majors and lower wages very soon in a workplace near you!

Nigger, try reading any serious computer science paper and you'll know how important and useful mathematics is. Let me help you here, search e.g. optical flow estimation. It's a problem from computer vision. It can be used to make a slow motion of a video.

Because it's slightly debated on whether it's actually PEMDAS or if it's a hierarchy that goes parentheses/exponents/multiplication and division/addition and subtraction and if two operations are on the same level you default to left-to-right, maybe?

P -> E -> M&D -> A&S, when two operations are of equal status, the equation is processed left to right. That's how PEMDAS has always worked. I don't understand what the "old way" is, I legit do not know of any way of processing that equation that it could equal 1.

>a = 1, b = -1 and n = 2
with what modulus?

>a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6
6 | 2^2 - 4^2
6 | 4 - 16
6 | -12
this is true, 6*(-2)=-12
but only by chance is it true, probably not for n=3
a=2 has a remainder of two when divided by 6, and b=4 has a remainder of 4 when divided by 6. their remainders are different when divided by m, thus my theorem does not apply.

the theorem states that a and b both have the same remainder when divided by m for it to be true

>If it got through the whole "chain of command" of education, and its allowed, then there must be some value to it.
Let me tell you about the jews...

>Q.E.D. followed immediately by therefor
Did you fail every language course? This reads as "The following, as demonstrated: therefor ..."

At my university I had to take
>Calculus 1
>Calculus 2
>Discrete Math
>Linear Algebra
>Probability/Statistics
all of those are relevant in CS

for example, just to throw out some random numbers as an example.
let m=7, a=17, b=24 and n be an arbitrary positive integer.
so you have:
7 | 17^n - 24^n
this is true for all n, because 17 has remainder 3 when divided by 7 and 24 has remainder 3 when divided by 7. using modular arithmetic and integer rings you could rewrite the above expression as
7 | 3^n - 3^n
which is surely true for all n.
all that matters is that the remainders of a and b are equal to each other when divided by n for my theorem to hold true

I don't know what their motivation is but I suspect this is more about some academic knowledge being poorly understood by politicians that prompted generalizing math early. Because of that they'd have to explain abstract topics well before the majority of children are able to comprehend this via this higher goal.

It's possible that the teachers are confused too. It was never in their job description to do math or understand it.
I doubt it's actually about compromising tests. There's more silent and effective ways of doing this. Give more multiple choice questions. Lower score requirements over time. Group students differently and give them test adjusted to their ability but have them share scores.

If kids come home telling their parents they're not taught any rigid mathematics then they'll be very upset. My parents were upset that our class was too big. They got change but even if they didn't the fury was rather major. My first contact with adults yelling at each other.
If this were the case they'd probably have taken violent retribution or something.

Tfw I'm a pretty cluey guy but didn't do computer science. There's often times when I need to do something but don't know the math to do it. I think the hardest part is not learning or executing the math but actually knowing the approaches in the first place

did it in precalc.
dont give a fuck about formal use of QED and knock-off triforces.
the math is correct and thats all that matters

>t. linguistic necrophiliac

the statement you wrote is that
>if a^n = b^n (mod m) for some n, then a = b (mod m)
This isn't true, since there's counter examples. It sounds like you mean
>a = b (mod m) if and only if a^n=b^n (mod m) for all n
but this statement is pretty trivial and shouldn't be called a theorem.

Got it, the woman is saying the "old way" was:
5(2*2)
20/20
1

But it wasn't and she's lying to those kids.

both statements are true.
give me one counterexample of a^n being congruent to b^n (mod m) where a is not congruent to b (mod m)
just one counterexample, it should be easy, right?

I gave you two counter examples
>a = 1, b = -1, n = 2, m any natural number
or
>a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6.

Also, looking at your argument, you get r_1^n = r_2^n, but this doesn't imply r_1 = r_2. It does mean though that r_1 = +-r_2, and from this you can say
>a^n = b^n (mod m) implies a = b (mod m) or a = -b (mod m),
which is true.

OBSESSED

>a = 1, b = -1, n = 2, m any natural number
m | 0
lol this is trivially true

>a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6.
you must not be understanding what modular congurency is.
a=2 (mod 6) is congurent to 2.
b=4 (mod 6) is congruent to 4.
the theorem does not apply.

Here you go buddy

a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6.
a and b must have the same remainder when divided by 6 for the theorem.
a and b's remainders are different.
this is not a counterexample.

Computer Science is kind of a misnomer. Computer Science is really all about the representation and manipulation of data. It involves data structures, algorithms, and run-time analysis, all of which can get pretty math-intensive the deeper you get.

Even if you're making a game, and SPECIALLY if you're making a game, math is a need.
Multiply is your best friend and square root your waifu.

thanks, saved!

just started cs and I've taken calc 2, discrete math, and multidimensional math. not really that hard.

>a = 2, b = 4, n = 2, m = 6.
this is still true, 6 does divide -12, because 6*(-2) = -12
but its only true by chance, not because of the theorem. i stated that here:
>this is true, 6*(-2)=-12
>but only by chance is it true, probably not for n=3
>a=2 has a remainder of two when divided by 6, and b=4 has a remainder of 4 when divided by 6. their remainders are different when divided by m, thus my theorem does not apply.

>math is about things that can be counted
Your level of understanding math hasn't improved much since elementary school, am I right?

Sorry that this seems to have gotten heated. As you've written it, you've claimed
>if a^n = b^n (mod m) for some n, then a = b (mod m).
I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but in any case it isn't true. The above statement says that whenever a^n = b^n (mod m), then it must also be true that a = b (mod m). But there are examples where the first half is true but the second half isn't.

Your subsequent posts seem to be saying instead
>if a = b (mod m), then a^n = b^n (mod m) for any n.
When you rearrange it this way, it becomes true.

>a^n = b^n (mod m) for some n, then a = b (mod
You do realize that the triple bar equal sign means 'congruent' and not 'equal to' right? They are different and the statement is true

It's pretty useful in geometry.

Yes, I do know that. The equals sign and the congruence sign here mean the same thing, which is 'equivalent modulo m'. I correct the homework assignments of computer science students, so please believe that I'm not completely ignorant.

I'd ask you to return to original photo you posted and examine the statement you set out to prove. Identify what you're assuming in that statement and what you're trying to conclude.

It's good that you've taken an active interest is mathematics, but it's important to be able to be able to learn from constructive criticism and to be willing to re-examine your work.

>What is a quadratic formula for? Ask literally any college graduate, they don't know.
They won't answer you because it's an abstract concept you dummy.
That's the same as if I asked you "what are things and objects for?"

>people still fall for this awful shoop
you can see the fucking safari toolbar on the edge that's off the screen

It's not a screen, it's a projection.

>itt: the same discussion that people have over and over for years on /sci/ but worse

>want to learn how to program for a game
>our basic programming language classes requires you to pass a required pre-algebra class, take college level algebra, calculus I, calculus II, calculus III, differential equations, and trig I & II
>hate math and barely passed the pre-algebra class because I'm incapable of doing calculations beyond addition and subtraction without a calculator

>want to learn how to program for a game
Why would you even consider going to a college then? Ever heard of boot camps? They'll make you ready in few months instead of years.

>analysing recursive algorithms
>any kind of mathematical proof
Don't know why but I never know where to start with this stuff.

I more just wanted to do it as a side thing while I get my law degree since I've been excelling in the field. Got a 3.9GPA on nothing but law classes for the past three years.
Saw "Intro to Programming" two credit class on my catalog and thought it could be a fun course, went to get information from a counselor about it and they said that I basically needed a degree in mathematics to even take it.
I took it anyway this term and it's literally just a class teaching people basic logistics, how to make certain things function, and vocabulary. I've got one week of it left and the most math I've used was kindergarten-tier.
Remade minesweeper in python.

Really any basic programming course is trivial.
It's not even about calculation as you claim to struggle with. It's all about systems knowledge. Any intro course wouldn't even test problem solving.
They're awfully slow for some reason though.

A degree is a proof that you're able to fit into the middle class system.
It shows you were able to attend classes, deal with pointless shit you don't care about, manage your time, finish complicated tasks, solve problems on your own, deliver on time and do all the shit that's expected from a good goy employee.
Nobody cares how good you are if you can't fit in. You say you hate math and it's only an obstacle because you just want to make vidya. On the contrary - if you were able to finish all that math despite hating it so much, that shows your true value in the eyes of an employer.

>Really any basic programming course is trivial.
The thing with this type of courses is, it can be literally anything.

If niggers were able to build the pyramids, why aren't they able to do math properly?

...

Some of them can do math extremely well. Just like there's a lot of white mouth-breathing idiots. And besides, you only really need a few people who know math really well, and then a few more that know it well enough, or are specialized in a few practical areas relevant to their trade. The rest can just be average intelligence to borderline retarded as long as they can lift heavy things and then put them where needed.

I don't give a shit about Jewployers, I've already got a letter of recommendation from two judges and my constitutional law professor.
I just don't like how they talk it up a ton when really all I've seen that is applicable is understanding variable concepts and some basic trigonometry. Most of the time they just try to push you through as many courses as possible since they sell almost a million dollars worth of overpriced cheap books. It's a racket. College is a mistake.

The beauty of math is that while there may be many different ways to solve a problem, there is only 1 correct answer. Teaching kids that multiple answers can be correct is fucking stupid and teachers should be fucking fired.

Smart niggers designed the pyramid, dumb niggers build it. Just like today.

>I don't give a shit about Jewployers
well then you have literally no reason to waste your time that way

College at this point is purely academical for me, if I didn't get my books covered for free by the government for maintaining good work I wouldn't even bother. I just wanted to see what the class was like and it's horse shit how much math they try to plug into it. Reminds me of how every single degree requires psychology and human relations shit.

from what I see the US system doesn't just fail at teaching math; it even fails at explaining why it's important

If you have a solid grasp of logic and a basic understanding of math, most programming is dead simple. People don't roll their own implementations of mathematical functions anymore, they use one of the hundreds of exceedingly efficient implementations already out there. It's not 1996 anymore, unless you're writing your own 3D game engine, you don't need to know much math. If you're writing a 2D engine, Linear Algebra will help you quite a bit, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's required. If you use any prebuilt frameworks or engines, all the math you need to know is the math you're going to use in your game's logic, so if you keep it simple you can get away with knowing fuck all.

>explaining why it's important
I think that's a global issue.
It's told here but it isn't taught.
And because tests are constructed to test knowledge not understanding schools focus on teaching knowledge. Which means extremely little in math on that level and makes associating math to problems very hard since every single problem description tells you to do something and then you do it.

well then try programming me an efficient brake system without this useless math or a regulator controlling a steady flow of liquid between tanks of different volume or even do some basic image or sound processing

>since every single problem description tells you to do something and then you do it.
Yeah, I kinda see why it might be a problem
I was generally taught in a way, where you presented some problems whose solutions would guide you towards the theory, instead of laying the theory out flat before you. But that requires time (which you don't have because of the schedules) and skilled teachers (which usually don't work at schools).
I have this book from the middle school where the student basically "reinvents" the whole geometry on his own from Euclid axioms by building theorems upon theorems just by solving strategically picked problems whose solutions you use to solve the next ones.

>calc 1 and 2
when in cs have you had to find the area under a curved line

>area under a curved line