|
|
|
|
|
|
by bw2
4798 days ago
|
|
|
While this will like devolve into a trite discussion about why programming computers is just the same as building a bridge, it's offensive that the software industry takes for granted just how much work goes into earning something like this ring versus coding JavaScript. I worked my way through college doing web development while studying 80 hours per week on top of that for years to get my engineering degrees. Having systematic devaluation of that is deflating, if not wrong. |
|
|
The skills you have, how you use them and where you learned them are inputs which means that on their own they are largely irrelevant.
It's entirely possible to make a good career, delivering genuine value to organisations and individuals, doing work you can be proud of without having any understanding of CS beyond that you'll pick up during your day to day work and a little reading around the subject. I've worked with great programmers who graduated in science, history, psychology, electronic engineering and so on. These were people who could go toe to toe technically with CS graduates and in some cases they bought things to the table that added significant value which were relatively rare in people with a more conventional computing background. Why does the fact of having not studied computer science formally make them any less valuable?
Bottom line: yes you worked very hard to get your degree and made a significant financial investment in it, but what's important now is what you do with it and that's what you'll be judged on. If you can't translate that knowledge into results why should it be significant?