The Blog of Curtis Chambers

There’s an ongoing debate about this article over on Slashdot right now. While I completely disagree with the author of the book that math shouldn’t be part of computer science, I do believe that a lot needs to be changed in traditional computer science education.

First off we need to look at the traditional definition of computer. Back in the day, the word computer referred to anything that performed computations, even a human. If I sat in a room and punched numbers into a calculator to perform computations, I was a computer. We then created mechanical computers that could perform those same calculations even faster than we could, and subsequently we created the electric computers that we all use today. But the basic word “computer” comes from something (or someone) that performs sequences of computations, and those sequences of computations are called algorithms. This is why when you major in computer science at a university, a good majority of the time is spent on analyzing algorithms and the math behind them.

So from a historical standpoint, I can understand why a degree in computer science is very math intensive. A pure computer scientist is only concerned with algorithms and how to compute them. However, computers have come a long way in the past several years and one could argue that even though there are underlying algorithms that power the programs we use, the majority of people do not use computers for computations anymore, but rather for communication. The computational aspect of computers has been abstracted for the most part.

For example, the average computer user only uses the computer to browse the Internet, instant message/e-mail friends, manipulate digital photos and listen to music. According to an NPR survey, 92% of Americans under 60 have used a computer, 75% have used the Internet, 67% have sent an e-mail and 68% use a computer at work. So while 20+ years ago the users of computers were mostly computer scientists performing calculations, today we’re in the minority of computer users. In my mind, this means that the field of computer science needs to be broadened beyond pure algorithmic study.

Due to the acceptance of computers and the Internet by the mainstream population, we now have a great deal of non-computational issues that should be discussed that deal with the communication, business, and legal aspects of computing. Things such as privacy, security, intellectual property and media distribution are things that are studied in grad school, but yet seem to have no means for discussion in the current undergraduate system. Should there not be discussion on what a computer scientist creates before they create it, and whether it should be created at all? A similar ethics question is typically posed to traditional scientists as well in regards to things such as the atomic bomb and cloning. Just because we can create it doesn’t necessarily mean we should, right?

I think that computers are becoming more than tools and are starting to actually shape society. People are using them for communication, personal connections, business and many other things. Even some people are proposing new job types such as Director of Metadata. Perhaps these things should fall under other fields of study such as communications, sociology and philosophy, but I find that those departments haven’t adopted studying these new technologies very quickly. What can we do to educate people about the new fields of study in relation to computer science?

What is the future of identity? As society continues to grow ever more large, proving that you are you is becoming more of a problem every day. We have so many numbers that identify us now, such as social security, phone, credit card and bank account numbers, that it makes me wonder if there’s not a better way to handle this whole problem. It’s really not a scalable solution.

Traditionally, in small communities this wasn’t an issue as there weren’t enough people to have unknown community members. This is still the case in small towns where everyone knows everyone. But now with the urban population exceeding the rural population for the first time in human history, we’re having the inverse problem of everyone knowing virtually no one in their community. Think about it…how many people in your apartment complex do you really know? How many people that live on your block do you know?

Banks used to know their customers by name and now we’re just numbers. Now that numbers can be spoofed they’re looking into biometrics such as fingerprint and retina scans. But it’s only a matter of time until those become spoofed as well, and then what? At least with numbers we can just make up a new one once our identity is compromised. Are they going to issue us new fingers and eyeballs?

I tend to be a pretty private person, so starting this blog will be an interesting experiment for me in terms of branching out beyond my typical comfort zone.

I was actually inspired to do this one night after leaving The Living Room in Point Loma.  There’s an older gentleman that frequents the shop most nights, perhaps in his 60’s, and he just comes in and uses the Internet until they close at midnight and then rides his motorcycle off into the distance.

One night we happened to start chatting and got into all kinds of discussions, including things like neuroscience, engineering, technology’s effect on culture and society, and sailboats.  He actually lives on a sailboat and travels all over the world in it and uses his motorcycle to get to places with Internet access so that he can listen to podcasts and watch videos.  Anyway, we just had a really fascinating discussion and made me yearn for more discussion on a wide variety of topics, which is why I started this blog.  I’m hoping it will give me an outlet for my random thoughts and facilitate discussion with my friends worldwide.

This is the first of what I hope to be many posts, so please comment away!