brownc@utah-cs.UUCP (Eric C. Brown) (12/08/84)
Subject: Where have all the hackers gone? Newsgroups: net.college, net.cse The following is a message that I have forwarded for a friend of mine: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because of the popularity of computer science as a field of study as of late, many computer science departments have been forced to severely limit enrollment. Generally they do this by raising entrance requirements and by requiring new freshmen to take "weed out" courses designed to make computer science as unpleasant as possible. This ensures that only the fittest students will survive, the rest being exiled to other majors or other schools. There is only one disturbing fact: The fittest students aren't neccessarily the best programmers. Computer science departments around the country are systematically screening out the hackers. The department I belong has very few undergraduate hacker types. They are being replaced by normal looking, normal acting people who only want to make money. They do their assignments on time, and seldom write anything that they aren't either getting credit for, or being paid for. It's sickening. Where have the hackers gone? They must have gone somewhere. Does anyone know of a computer science department somewhere that has decent facilities but still allows undergraduates the oppertunity to work on their own prodjects. Is there anyplace out there that gives undergraduates access to uucp. I know that that is a lot to ask of a department, but the must be someplace, deep in the backwaters of computer sciencedom, laid back enough to give undergraduates the opportunity to really learn how to program. Steven (Harley) Davidson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Send Replies, Flames, and so forth to: ..!decvax!harpo!utah-cs!brownc and I will forward them. Eric C. Brown (the grumpy)
allyn@sdcsvax.UUCP (Allyn Fratkin) (12/09/84)
In article <3138@utah-cs.UUCP>, Steve Davidson writes: > > ... "weed out" courses designed to make > computer science as unpleasant as possible. This ensures that only the > fittest students will survive, the rest being exiled to other majors or > other schools. There is only one disturbing fact: The fittest students > aren't neccessarily the best programmers. > > Computer science departments around the country are systematically screening > out the hackers. The department I belong has very few undergraduate hacker > types. They are being replaced by normal looking, normal acting people who > only want to make money. They do their assignments on time, and seldom write > anything that they aren't either getting credit for, or being paid for. It's > sickening. I'm an undergraduate at UC San Diego, and I have seen this exile here also. The "fittest students" are the ones with the best grades, not the ones that are the best programmers. In fact, there is not really a class in how to be a good programmer. Sure, we have a data structures course. So what? When I took it, anyone that got the correct output on a prgram got full credit. It didn't matter if you did extra work handling special cases or did the bare minimum to get by. It didn't matter what your programs looked like. I'm afraid this is the problem at a fair number of schools. We don't have it as bad as some schools. All students (undergrads and grads) can get computer 'literacy' accounts on Unix or VMS. These are limited accounts, but are enough to get some real work done (no hacking, though). We have full access to UUCP and USENET also. Our computer center has 8 vaxen, 3 running Unix, and two Pyramids. I don't think CS departments are purposely screening out hackers. I think it's just happening due to convenience. And resource scarcity. And there's very little we can do about it. -- From the virtual mind of Allyn Fratkin sdcsvax!allyn@Nosc UCSD Pascal Project {ucbvax, decvax, ihnp4} U.C. San Diego !sdcsvax!allyn "Generally you don't see that kind of behavior in a major appliance."
jona@clyde.UUCP (Jon Allingham) (12/10/84)
> ... > Where have the hackers gone? They must have gone somewhere. Does >anyone know of a computer science department somewhere that has decent >facilities but still allows undergraduates the oppertunity to work on >their own projects. Is there anyplace out there that gives >undergraduates access to uucp. > I know that that is a lot to ask of a department, but the must >be someplace, deep in the backwaters of computer sciencedom, laid back >enough to give undergraduates the opportunity to really learn how to >program. > ... I don't really think this 'article' is serious, but I'm responding anyway. I agree that too many schools are limiting computer access and enrollment and that many budding computer scientists do just their work and not anything creative, however I do not agree that hackers make the best programmers. 1) many hacker-types I met in school were more interested in working on their own projects and didn't always do the work they were supposed to. This is not a person I would want to work for me. 2) their programs were often extremely clever, making use of lots of unkown/unused features/bugs of various machines - often unportable between different sites with the same series machine. 3) they tend to spend most of their time in the computer center and often neglect other classwork they find dull and uninteresting. I still feel that an engineer should know more than just his/her specialty in order to be more flexible. 4) how much future is there in hacking/programming? If all you want to do is spend >8 hrs/day programming for the rest of your life fine, I would get bored after a few years of that. I do want to point out that I am not anti-hacker. I spent most of my college career in the computer center. Since I worked in the Comp Center, I was one of the few people who had unlimited computer resources and access and I took full advantage of that. ( not only that, but as cliche as it may sound: some of my best friends are hackers. ) Jon A. PS. For those of us with true understanding, hacking is the only pure art form. -- Jon M. Allingham (201)386-3466 AT&T Bell Laboratories-WH "Beam me up Scotty, no intelligent life down here!"
susie@uwmacc.UUCP (sue brunkow) (12/12/84)
In article <521@sdcsvax.UUCP> allyn@sdcsvax.UUCP (Allyn Fratkin) writes: > >I'm an undergraduate at UC San Diego, and I have seen this exile here also. >The "fittest students" are the ones with the best grades, not the ones that >are the best programmers. In fact, there is not really a class in how to > ... Isn't this the same as what has been going on all along in Medical School admissions? The people who have the best grades get in, but they don't necessarily make the best doctors. I've know several people who really liked people and enjoyed working with them, but couldn't get the grades to get into Med school. I've also known people whose only interest in life was themself, and some of them did get in. If you've had doctors who treat you like an illness, not a person, maybe there's a reason for this. I'm not saying that anyone who wants to be a doctor should be able to, a lot of intelligence is obviously necessary. But grades aren't always a good indication of anything but the ability to get grades. Sue Brunkow Univ. of Wisconsin {seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!uwvax!uwmacc!susie
derek@uwvax.UUCP (Derek Zahn) (12/12/84)
>... however I do not agree that hackers make the best programmers. > > 1) many hacker-types I met in school were more interested in working on > their own projects and didn't always do the work they were supposed > to. This is not a person I would want to work for me. > > 3) they tend to spend most of their time in the computer center and > often neglect other classwork they find dull and uninteresting. > I still feel that an engineer should know more than just his/her > specialty in order to be more flexible. > > > I do want to point out that I am not anti-hacker. I spent most of > my college career in the computer center. > > For those of us with true understanding, hacking is the only pure > art form. Well fine -- you wouldn't hire yourself. The way I think of it: hackers (not meaning the 15-year old TRW crackers that infuriate me whenever I hear about them) do tend to do many of the things that you say. However, I find the hackers I hang around with to be a remarkably eclectic group who just happen to share a passion for computers. While it is true that they are often unruly and unorthodox in their programming, that stems from their brilliance (sometimes) and their mastery of their machines. For grunge-work programming, no, I would not hire a 'hacker' either, which is porbably good since they don't want that kind of work. I would hire yesterday's 'hackers' as today's innovators. derek -- Derek Zahn @ wisconsin ...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!derek derek@wisc-rsch.arpa
shebs@utah-cs.UUCP (Stanley Shebs) (12/13/84)
I agree with jona@clyde, most hackers are not good programmers. I've had several jobs in which an inordinate amount of time was spent cleaning up after some hacker's mess. Universities don't need to cater to hackers' "needs" anyway. There are plenty of machines (including PCs) out in the world, and you don't need a degree to hack - you just do it. You'll probably have to form your own company though; most middle- to large-size companies are beginning to realize that hackers cost more than they're worth, over the long run... stan shebs (shebs@utah-orion)
jona@clyde.UUCP (Jon Allingham) (12/14/84)
> ... > While it is true that they are often unruly and unorthodox in their > programming, that stems from their brilliance (sometimes) and their > mastery of their machines. > For grunge-work programming, no, I would not hire a 'hacker' > either, which is porbably good since they don't want that kind of work. > I would hire yesterday's 'hackers' as today's innovators. I dispute the word 'brilliance' even if it carries a disclaimer ('sometimes'). Have you ever tried to maintain or understand some of these 'innovative' programs? -- Jon M. Allingham (201)386-3466 AT&T Bell Laboratories-WH "Beam me up Scotty, no intelligent life down here!"
konkin@sask.UUCP (Doug Konkin ) (12/15/84)
[] I don't want to stir up the ashes, but bemoaning the departure of hackers from the Computer Science departments of the continent, and their subsequent replacement with all manner of money-grubbing clones in trendy clothes (likely Commerce Cmpt majors) is a load. There are still lots of hackers around, even if access to the guts of department computers is becoming more restricted. I think that if the author of the posting checked carefully, he would find that the people that he calls hackers are disappearing not so much because they are being bested by the aforementioned mercenaries, but rather because they can't hack the theory necessary to be a computer scientist. Technical schools turn out programmers -- we university types are supposedly capable of much more. Doug Konkin Dept of Computational Science U of Saskatchewan ihnp4!sask!konkin
derek@uwvax.UUCP (Derek Zahn) (12/15/84)
> Have you ever tried to maintain or understand some of these 'innovative' > programs? > -- Yes, I have. And in general I find: 1) Hacked code written by high-schoolers and others without formal training is difficult and unreadable. 2) Given formal (university) training, the code produced by the hackers I have known is quite readable. In fact, the most unreadable code I know is the system source for unix. Of course, how much of a "hack" is 4.2BSD? A question perhaps up for debate.... P. S. (Just a guess) It seems likely that the 4.2 kernel was originally written with meaningful variable names, and then these were substituted for the short meaningless ones we see in order to save on disk space. If this is true, does anyone know of kernel source still retaining the easier-to-read variables? I would be willing to sacrifice some disk space for a kernel that was easier to read. derek -- Derek Zahn @ wisconsin ...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!derek derek@wisc-rsch.arpa
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (12/17/84)
[] I don't think the hackers are annoyed or worried that there seem to be fewer and fewer of them nowdays. Hackers enjoy being an elite group. They also enjoy challenges. The harder the administration tries to shut them down the more they will enjoy it. Don't expect them to become extinct. Expect them to become invisible. Sean Casey "Captain, ya can't mix matter and antimatter cold!!!"
dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (12/17/84)
In article <145@sask.UUCP> konkin@sask.UUCP (Doug Konkin ) writes: > >There are >still lots of hackers around, even if access to the guts of department >computers is becoming more restricted. I think that if the author of >the posting checked carefully, he would find that the people that he >calls hackers are disappearing not so much because they are being >bested by the aforementioned mercenaries, but rather because they can't >hack the theory necessary to be a computer scientist. Technical schools >turn out programmers -- we university types are supposedly capable of >much more. When I was an undergrad, many of the "hackers" I knew were certainly capable of handling theory. Several were scholarship students, some obtained pure mathematics (not the easier computer science) degrees, some have masters' degrees now. These people have written a Lisp interpreter, an operating system (Coherent), an Ada compiler, helped build DECtalk, and other less-well-known projects. They are certainly more capable than most of the people walking around with "computer science" degrees. I am worried about the future of hacking because I am worried that people of this quality no longer seem to have an environment available where they can work on their own projects, at least at Waterloo.
adolph@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark Adolph) (12/19/84)
*** YOUR MESSAGE *** > The people who have the best grades get in, but they don't necessarily > make the best doctors. I've know several people who really liked > people and enjoyed working with them, but couldn't get the grades to > get into Med school. I've also known people whose only interest in > life was themself, and some of them did get in. If you've had doctors > who treat you like an illness, not a person, maybe there's a reason > for this. I frankly wouldn't trust *any* of the premeds I've met as doctors, and I'm starting to wonder about the people who are already doctors, since they were once premeds, too. -- Mark A. ...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!adolph "Computers are like preppies: they just boil around in their own way and you have to do things their way or they blow you off." "Everything that was different was a different thing..."
ee161aok@sdcc13.UUCP ({|stu) (12/27/84)
>> >>I'm an undergraduate at UC San Diego, and I have seen this exile here also. >>The "fittest students" are the ones with the best grades, not the ones that >>are the best programmers. In fact, there is not really a class in how to >> ... As an employer, the first thing I would avoid is hackers. People who have a fascination with computers tend not to accomplish as much as those who treat the machine as a device to accomplish an end. The student who gets good grades has two important qualities: 1) at least a fair understanding of the material presented to him/her in class. 2) the demonstrated ability to satisfy requirements and demands that are placed on him/her. A good student can be taught, while a hacker has to be negotiated with. Give me a student over a hacker anyday. steve ackroyd
brian@sdcc3.UUCP (Brian Kantor) (12/27/84)
> >>I'm an undergraduate at UC San Diego, and I have seen this exile here also. > >>The "fittest students" are the ones with the best grades, not the ones that > >>are the best programmers. > > As an employer, the first thing I would avoid is hackers. > A good student can be taught, while a hacker has to be > negotiated with. Give me a student over a hacker anyday. I've been in a position of hiring recent graduates for programming jobs, and in general I found that neither the ``ultimate hacker'' nor the ``top student'' made the best programmer/analyst. Why not? The hackers just didn't have long enough attention spans, and didn't seem to want to spend enough time to get the problem clearly defined - the jumped into the solution without a clear feeling for what the real problem was. Most commonly, they solved what the customer had SAID the problem was, rather than what it really was. (You experienced people know that the customer is rarely right in defining his problem.) So their solution was a good one, but for the wrong problem. The top students had two major problems: too many of them wanted to make it big, moving into management instead of programming. Seems they had their eye on the president's office rather than their terminal. In a team, they tended to try to run things, rather than get things done. The other problem that many of the top students had was a severe lack of imagination. They had a lot of trouble applying book learning to real problems. It seemed as though they had just never had to worry about making a program conform to the real world. I noticed this especially when they had to work for me on a machine that had a bizzare programming language (sort of a cross between Basic and PL/I). Many never were able to adapt to the techniques that machine required (A Microdata REALITY, in case you were curious). Who, then, made the best for our purposes? Our most successful programmers were people who had done something else for a living. One managed a nationwide chain of Karate Parlors before going back to school and learning programming, another had trained as a physicist, one an air force pilot until he lost a hand in VietNam. What made these people different from the others is not that they were older or more experienced - because some were and some weren't. What made them different is that they had come to view the computer as A TOOL USED TO SOLVE REAL PROBLEMS. They understood that it was the real-world problem that had to be solved, not a nifty algorithm, nor a textbook exercise. But how do you teach people this? Since very few professors of computer science do anything real-world with their skills, they really can't pass on true-life experience to their students. Industry professionals could, but it seems that many problems might require too much detailed background knowledge to serve well as examples. Also, people in industry rarely have time to spare. I feel that a good curriculum in computer science should include some sort of class in problem solving - something that teaches people to look for the REAL problem, and solve it. Yes, it will weed out a bunch of people; and yes, it will be hard to teach. But if we truely intend a computer science education to fit its graduates to do more than sit in a college or university office and dream about theories, we have to equip the students in it with skills and techniques that will enable them to shape their skills to suit the needs of their employment. Be clear that this is NOT rote knowledge - it is a learning skill. Being the best buggy-whip programmer in the world isn't worth a tinker's dam when its time to build spaceships, if that is all you know how to do. Brian Kantor UC San Diego decvax\ brian@ucsd.arpa akgua >--- sdcsvax --- brian ucbvax/ Kantor@Nosc Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day Fritter and waste the hours in an offhand way...
figmo@tymix.UUCP (Lynn Gold) (01/01/85)
> > ... > > While it is true that they are often unruly and unorthodox in their > > programming, that stems from their brilliance (sometimes) and their > > mastery of their machines. > > For grunge-work programming, no, I would not hire a 'hacker' > > either, which is porbably good since they don't want that kind of work. > > I would hire yesterday's 'hackers' as today's innovators. > > I dispute the word 'brilliance' even if it carries a disclaimer ('sometimes'). > > Have you ever tried to maintain or understand some of these 'innovative' > programs? > -- > Jon M. Allingham (201)386-3466 AT&T Bell Laboratories-WH > > "Beam me up Scotty, no intelligent life down here!" As an alumna of Columbia's Hackers' Club, I have a few things to comment on: 1. Everyone who was in the Hackers' Club -- no exceptions -- has done well in the computing field. 2. Sometimes what one is assigned to do for homework has less relevance than what one does on one's own. We had one hacker who was more interested in writing a version of PACMAN than writing payroll programs. When he graduated he was hired by a well-known manufacturer of computer games. As far as I know, he has YET to be asked to write a payroll program. 3. Why school, you may ask? School polishes up a hacker's skills. Hacking alone does not teach structured programming. Even the student who would rather do stuff on their own quickly sees the benefits of some of the tech- niques taught in classes and in their textbooks. A hacker needs good ways to express their programming ideas. 4. With regards to maintainability, I've seen clearly-written code done by many hackers. I've also seen "happy" code (as in "Why should I comment this? It's clear to ME, so it doesn't need any!") and spaghetti code (GOTOs everywhere humanely possible -- and THEN some) written by people who got good grades. Perhaps the answer to the problem lies in self-paced learning and in allowing students to make choices as to what kinds of projects interest them (and teach the skills the assignments are intended to teach). --Lynn Gold Tymnet, Inc.