D

[Dr. Galen Bunting, now querying @inratsalley]

if you're a graduate student at Northeastern University and you're interested in being a part of our efforts to unionize, sign a union card here! https://t.co/0Q1f521X0v

[D @dbp__]

@PTOOP @TaliaRinger @ShriramKMurthi @JAldrichPL To some extent, I think this reflects the way jobs: a second class, lower paid, more contingent position is not going to lead to serious attention. The positions are a creation of the modern university though, so not totally surprising…

[D @dbp__]

@Blaisorblade @jonmsterling Yes, and it’s pretty established that scamming is more successful if you make it ridiculous (intentional typos, classically), to weed out people unlikely to fall for rest of scam.

[D @dbp__]

@jonmsterling Lol yeah. Impulse “this gonna make money, I’ll figure out the rest later” buy

[D @dbp__]

@krismicinski @d_feldman THE CAMEL'S HANDS ARE CLEAN!

[D @dbp__]

@krismicinski I wonder if you’ve built up a much more sophisticated ad profile, so the promoted stuff you get is… relevant (ish). Whereas the default stuff that gets pushed out is just awful (I think that’s generally true of, e.g., YouTube)

[D @dbp__]

@ShriramKMurthi @btbytes Says the person that’s the only reason I wrote Java in undergrad :P

[D @dbp__]

@hillelogram Another difference: software engineers should know how to work on teams/projects much larger than they can tackle.

[D @dbp__]

@djg98115 @samth @MattZeitlin It’s not usually a ingredient we add on its own, rather than as part of@an organic compound (I guess cooking in cast iron almost counts…)

[D @dbp__]

@EvanMPeck Yes, though I think the path is somewhat roundabout: teach about specifications, tests, and that we use that to filter out generated code that doesn't make sense. (Caveat: I'm working on the former, _not_ trying to incorporate copilot into it! Though I'd like to in the future)

[D @dbp__]

@rickasaurus @satnam6502 Sure. But classes like software dev / eng exist! Possibly even required

[D @dbp__]

@satnam6502 @rickasaurus I think there’s a lot to be said for what’s in this thread — we should absolutely be teaching the essence of modern systems, but ideally not the details (which change quickly and are easy to look up). How to do that is tricky!

[Shreya Shankar @sh_reya]

Ok I have thoughts on whether there should be separate CS courses for those who want to just use the tool vs go in deep. 5 years ago I thought absolutely, why learn about semaphores when you’ll write Python for a living. Now I think yes but the course should still go deep

[D @dbp__]

@d11a_24 @johncollins60 @moyix You’re missing the point (which I just said: maybe reread?). There’s no question that this site could be built with many fewer people. But given that it _wasn’t_, a very different question whether it can transition without significant downtime. Code reflects human organization.

[D @dbp__]

@johncollins60 @moyix Building something from scratch to require a small number of people to maintain (e.g., early WhatsApp) is pretty diff. from a massive distributed system that’s been built/evolved/maintained by thousands suddenly losing nearly everyone who knew how it works.

[D @dbp__]

@wilbowma @johnregehr What rock have you been under and can I come live there too?

[D @dbp__]

@jonmsterling Somewhat self fulfilling though. It takes time & resources & ideas to fix such broken things… pushing it off to lower status overworked instructional staff is unlikely to ever improve things!

[D @dbp__]

@jonmsterling Universities are ideally both places of research and learning, and faculty should be participating in both of those things. Now in reality universities are corrupt money making endeavors, but ideally _faculty_ push back against that…

[D @dbp__]

@jonmsterling That makes sense. I think my original comment was pushback on the cultural idea among faculty (not necessarily those on here, but in general) that research is the only thing that matters, and if all teaching (& service) could go away, life would be perfect. I think that’s harmful