Hacker News Reader

Comment by ikeyany | Hacker News Reader

I believe that being in the "engineering mindset" is at odds with what many people are used to. I think it's the culture that some see and get scared away from, even if that perception isn't 100% accurate. People interested in fixing CS "inclusivity" should address this first.

View on HN

Given that computer science isn't engineering (they are distinct but different disciplines), can you elaborate on what you mean by the engineering mindset?

Can't speak for OP, but the engineering mindset usually comes from those of us who go into the program that tend to be very mathematical and logical, while being obsessed with figuring out how things work. When a group of engineers sits down at a table to eat lunch, they could spend an hour arguing about how the restaurant could be more efficient...etc. These kids are often used to independent problem solving and don't need to have their hands held. We had an economics teacher in college who was famous for asking the engineers to stand up on the first day of class and then stating that they would be excused from the finals as they would all have above a 95 and not have to take it. The only majors that get the math exposure we do are well mathematics and physics. The difference is we also have to do a lot of concrete things like fabrication, CAD, circuit design, and almost every other class gets some level of programming, so your entire world resolves around fixing things and applying problem solving techniques. They parody this in Dilbert, but engineers are weird birds. Comp Sci is similar in a way when you have a student coding for 12 hours straight as they're in the zone and coding an elegant solution. They aren't entirely dissimilar, but engineers often have a more formal math background and will attempt to approach a problem from that side. Someone with a PhD in math will be so far ahead of me, that I'll barely be able to catch a glimpse at the kinds of problems they solve. We do more practical things like design engines and stealth technology, while they work on things like the millennium problems. I once attended a lecture by a notable math professor on the Riemann Hypothesis basics. 1 hour in and I still didn't hear the problem properly stated. He said "the reason the riemann hypothesis is important is because it is the reimann hypothesis" wtf?!? Anyway, although it is somewhat stereotypical, each major seems to have a kind on niche person that is attracted to it.

> We had an economics teacher in college who was famous for asking the engineers to stand up on the first day of class and then stating that they would be excused from the finals as they would all have above a 95 and not have to take it.

To be honest with you, that teacher sounds like a real tool. All that that can possibly achieve is to breed various subtle forms of animosity, either among classmates or towards engineers or towards the teacher or the course.

No doubt about that. Really unprofessional.

> the reason the riemann hypothesis is important is because it is the reimann hypothesis

I can see this being a joke. Entire subfields of mathematics have been built on the assumption that Riemann hypothesis is true. He probably assumed that everyone in the audience would know this, which is not unreasonable.

In 6 years I never thought of it that way! :)

Thanks! Now I feel like an idiot.

Try "Trolling Euclid" book by Tom Wright, to understand why the Riemann Hypothesis is considered by many mathematicians to be the most important unsolved problem in mathematics today.

Will do, thanks!

Not a dig...but questions like this one. I get what you are asking, but I think that people outside of the discipline would be thinking, "You know what I mean. Why so pedantic?"

As an example, being "technically correct" is important for building a design to match a specification or for winning a logical argument.

But it is not an important skill for persuading people, or for cheering people up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com