How long can you mock your older brother in front of your hip young friends before he decides to ignore you and go play with his own friends somewhere else?
How long can you mock your older brother in front of your hip young friends before he decides to ignore you and go play with his own friends somewhere else?
Levers. No one said the pulley (or CAD) rendered the architect defunct, and no one is saying computers should do the same for mathematicians. We're just trying to understand this resistance to using tools to help do heavy lifting, the “human-centric bigotry” as the article puts it. Reading some of the responses here, it's probably being overstated, but even so.
And ignore you and go play somewhere else? A good number of the most influential computer scientists have actually been psychologists, not mathematicians, so the older brother needs to get the fuck over himself if that's his attitude!
I'd like to hear who you consider influential computer scientists coming from psychology. The ones I hold dear are mostly settlers from math.
If the younger brother were as wise as he thinks he is, he wouldn't need to get so worked up as to substitute profanity for an articulate argument.
Edit: As for psychologists, you're seriously telling me you never heard of Licklider? That's... astounding.
Consider programming. You don't need anything more than punch-cards to program. You don't need anything more than assembler. But higher-level languages can be useful, because they can make the task easier, give you greater leverage.
I thought the consensus was that it really depends on the type of problems one is trying to solve, and that most programmers can in fact get away with knowing little math.