←back to thread

Everything Is Just Functions: 1 week with David Beazley and SICP

(ezzeriesa.notion.site)
389 points kurinikku | 7 comments | 17 Nov 24 15:07 UTC | HN request time: 0.002s | source | bottom
Show context
richrichie ◴[17 Nov 24 16:02 UTC] No.42164857[source]▶
Has anyone read the new SICP with Javascript as language of choice?
replies(3): >>42165037 #>>42165082 #>>42165465 #
0xpgm ◴[17 Nov 24 16:39 UTC] No.42165082[source]▶
Isn't scheme with close to zero syntax so easy to learn?

Why did someone think it was a good idea to switch to JavaScript?

I think the person who'll get value out of SICP will not have any problem picking up scheme syntax on the fly.

replies(5): >>42165182 #>>42165278 #>>42166724 #>>42168084 #>>42168675 #
liontwist ◴[17 Nov 24 16:51 UTC] No.42165182[source]▶
I agree. Being self contained helps make it timeless. In contrast are books with a CD in the back with an outdated Java compiler you will never be able to setup. And then you have to migrate the snippets yourself.

If you study any other related field like math or physics you become accustomed to learning a formal system for the context of a particular problem.

CS students tend to have this weird careerist view where every page just directly help them get a job.

replies(2): >>42165303 #>>42165549 #
SoftTalker ◴[17 Nov 24 17:05 UTC] No.42165303[source]▶
Most undergrad CS students want a practical/engineering curriculum. They are not really there for theory, but for a long time that's how CS departments operated, unless maybe you were at an engineering school.

Schools are so desperate to keep up enrollment numbers today that many have capitulated and are giving students what they want instead of what the faculty thinks they need.

replies(4): >>42165476 #>>42165761 #>>42165848 #>>42166858 #
1. tharne ◴[17 Nov 24 17:32 UTC] No.42165476[source]▶
> Most undergrad CS students want a practical/engineering curriculum.

If all someone wants is the practical benefits of programming and has no interest in the underlying theory, they shouldn't waste their their time and money on a CS degree. All the practical information is available for free or at very low cost.

replies(2): >>42165550 #>>42165555 #
2. SoftTalker ◴[17 Nov 24 17:42 UTC] No.42165550[source]▶
But, a lot of employers demand a degree.
replies(1): >>42165968 #
3. lupire ◴[17 Nov 24 17:42 UTC] No.42165555[source]▶
The same applies to CS, so you're missing something else -- skilled tutors and the campus experience.
replies(1): >>42165985 #
4. tharne ◴[17 Nov 24 18:41 UTC] No.42165968[source]▶
Maybe so, but we shouldn't be doubling down on expensive and time consuming degrees in the name of ill-conceived credentialism. That hurts everyone except the universities profiting off of it.
replies(1): >>42166533 #
5. tharne ◴[17 Nov 24 18:43 UTC] No.42165985[source]▶
At least in the U.S., many students are paying upwards of a $100k for a four-year degree. That better be one hell of a "campus experience" and some next-level "skilled tutors".

Call me a hopeless optimist, but I think there's a better way out there.

replies(1): >>42168438 #
6. xelamonster ◴[17 Nov 24 19:45 UTC] No.42166533{3}[source]▶
How does that mean anything to the people who need to be employed to continue living? We're not the ones with the ability to change this.
7. galaxyLogic ◴[17 Nov 24 23:55 UTC] No.42168438{3}[source]▶
How about an AI-tutor? Actual professors don't have time to adapt their teaching to every indfividual studen's knowledge background. But AI might.

Universities should start their own AI-tutor development programs, in co-operation with others because, only way AI-tutors can become better is by practice practive practice.

So I'n not sure if this is a new viewpoint or not, but it is not only students that need training, it is also teachers who need to be trained more in teaching. AI is all about "training", understanding is about training. Training is the new paradigm for me.