The Daily Podcast on CS majors 9.29.25

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just listened. My take away is the increased/continued importance of liberal arts. We can't predict the job market so many years out, so much better to focus on the critical thinking and writing skills that will be important to any job, regardless of AI or new technology.

This is what every businessperson has been saying for the last five years.
Send your kids to schools where they learn to think critically, analyze, speak up, and write effectively. Progressive high schools. That's why they tend to outperform in the last two cycles in college placements.

College professors need these kids in their classes. They are begging T20 AO for more of them. Private high schools focus on these skills more than public high schools.

yes because English departments are closing due to a lack of interest.

Name one

Marymount in VA

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2023/02/26/marymount-eliminates-liberal-arts-degrees

Others are having to restructure or be combined with other depts.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/03/06/the-end-of-the-english-major

Even in the UK

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/dec/05/the-guardian-view-on-humanities-in-universities-closing-english-literature-courses-signals-a-crisis

Easy enough to google it.

Marymount eliminated degrees in mathematics science and economics, which I think we can both agree are extraordinarily popular-something tells me their 43 million dollar endowment may be more of a factor.

From the article you linked:

Jeffrey Cohen, a butter-voiced, bearded man who has been the dean of the humanities at A.S.U. since 2018, told me. On taking the position, he hired a marketing firm, Fervor, to sell the humanities better. It ran a market survey of eight hundred and twenty-six students.

“It was eye-opening to see their responses,” Cohen said. “In general, they loved the humanities and rated them higher than their other courses. However, they were unclear on what the humanities were—two hundred and twenty-two thought that biology was a humanity.”
The students also had no idea which careers humanities study led to, so Cohen decided to teach a course called Making a Career with a Humanities Major.

Doesn't sound like a lack of interest, just ignorance.

. Adjacent fields aren’t included in humanities tallies, and some of them are booming. Harvard’s history-of-science department has seen a fifty-per-cent increase in its majors in the past five years. The humanities creature who recites Cavafy at parties might fade away, but students are still getting their vitamins. There’s a lot of ethics in bioethics, after all.

The article emphasizes that students are mostly being convinced by institutions that STEM is all that matters, but finding themselves interested in the humanities, just lost. The article is pretty optimistic and just shows that the humanities need to change how they've traditionally approached things-attracting students by hermiting in the corner with their books.

The UK has a complete different issue and their economy is different. I want to narrow into the US, and stick to it.

Yes, and Marymount also eliminated their English major. So, I gave you an example.

In any case, people may have a passion for a certain subject, but most people can't make a decent living following their passion. I would love that if it were true. DD loves musical theater, but she knows there's very little chance that she will make a decent living following her passion.

It's a bad one though. For someone arguing that there's no interest in the humanities, you really are going to use an example of a tiny school with no endowment shuttering multiple lucrative programs as your main example? I'm happy to see you didn't read any of the article you sent. Classic DCUM.

LOL you asked me to name one example where a college got rid of the English major, I gave you one, and you claim it's a bad example.

Here's the thread:

me: yes because English departments are closing due to a lack of interest.
you: Name one
me: Marymount in VA
you: that's a bad example because the school is tiny and has no endowment.

Classic DCUM, indeed. LOL

Do you think it is reasonable to assert that economics is a declining field due to lack of interest, because Marymount university eliminated it as a field of study too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just listened. My take away is the increased/continued importance of liberal arts. We can't predict the job market so many years out, so much better to focus on the critical thinking and writing skills that will be important to any job, regardless of AI or new technology.

This is what every businessperson has been saying for the last five years.
Send your kids to schools where they learn to think critically, analyze, speak up, and write effectively. Progressive high schools. That's why they tend to outperform in the last two cycles in college placements.

College professors need these kids in their classes. They are begging T20 AO for more of them. Private high schools focus on these skills more than public high schools.

What makes people think CS majors aren't doing this too? They also have a liberal arts core, many double major in a non-tech major as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

Stripe nor meta pay thatch for entry level employees. Your kid needs a ton of training going into anthropic, you sound incredibly ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think these kids need to come up with a niche. Coding is a skill, just like writing. But you need substance to code or write about to distinguish yourself.

I'm certain someone who could code who also understands protein structures would have no problem getting a job. Or an entrepreneurial kid with business ideas who can code--that's how we have everything from Facebook to Uber to Google to AirBnB. You need to have something to contribute beyond just being able to code and I think you'll be highly marketable.

So may poster are clueless about what a CS degree actually is; they think it is coding boot camp. lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Really? How many industries are you personally hiring for right now to have such vast knowledge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

Stripe nor meta pay thatch for entry level employees. Your kid needs a ton of training going into anthropic, you sound incredibly ignorant.

Sounds like you are crazy jealous. Both Meta and Stripe absolutely are hiring kids into various groups where they are paying these kinds of dollars. Anthropic is also hiring these kids who are coming from top schools…again with tons of skills and Math and CS degrees. They are paying PhDs over $1MM.

These kids are coming from top 10 schools.

I am literally just the messenger. You can decide to not believe it and continue to believe what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

Stripe nor meta pay thatch for entry level employees. Your kid needs a ton of training going into anthropic, you sound incredibly ignorant.

+1, anthropic also isn't known to hire for entry roles. It is strange how much people here get away with lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

Stripe nor meta pay thatch for entry level employees. Your kid needs a ton of training going into anthropic, you sound incredibly ignorant.

Sounds like you are crazy jealous. Both Meta and Stripe absolutely are hiring kids into various groups where they are paying these kinds of dollars. Anthropic is also hiring these kids who are coming from top schools…again with tons of skills and Math and CS degrees. They are paying PhDs over $1MM.

These kids are coming from top 10 schools.

I am literally just the messenger. You can decide to not believe it and continue to believe what you want.

You are a liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Really? How many industries are you personally hiring for right now to have such vast knowledge?

I work in ML. The kids getting hired right now don't make $500,000 lmao. You clearly trust anything anyone says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

The days of a new grad with just good coding skills being paid $200K are gone.

BTW, my kid is a CS major, ML focus.

Where did those two kids graduate from? Do they have a masters? Most companies want people with research experience in ML/AI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The end of the podcast is the most revealing. By the time the edicts from tech successfully filter down to dominate curricula—hectoring kids to learn how to prompt/correct AI while stealing others’ actual creative work to perpetuate the system—those skills will be completely outdated, and only the top 20 univ grads will once again be hired, leaving yet another debt-saddled generation to wonder what went wrong.

If you aren't going to to 20 in your major, you are taking a gamble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this podcast;

First, coding does not equal Compute Science. Rambling on the history of code.org as it's a bad thing? nearly every field uses some sort of code. Even "Prompt Engineering" is beginning to look like code. I don't think teaching kids to code was bad.

The industry over hired and over paid in the last 5 - 10 years; they hired a lot of non CS majors to fill in roles. They even hired music majors that passed coding bootcamps.

CS majors will find jobs just not the dream $500K ones.

The AI state is right now like the early 1990s for CS - we haven't felt the boom yet. There are a lot of future billionaires working on sustainable startups.

+ 100%. Gone are the $200K starting salaries, but that doesn't mean CS is dead. Most companies require tech people, and CS is not just about simple coding. Yes, AI can do some coding, but you still need a human to review and QA.

AI can also replace writers, btw, and just like AI produced code, you still need someone to review the AI writing.

This actually isn’t true at all…my kid’s two friends that just graduated are making between $300k-$500k…my kid already has a 2027 offer at $250k.

These kids all have extensive ML and other AI capabilities which at least right now are very much in high demand.

The ideal CS person is like a mind-meld with the AI. They are massively more efficient but they also correct AI mistakes in real time.

Doing what? Unless your kids are doing quant finance or just got their PhDs in CS, they're not worth that much for any organization.

Well…Stripe and Meta and Anthropic think they are.

They have significant ML expertise and are proficient developers and know how to leverage AI exceptionally well. These kids can add value nearly Day 1 and need minimal training.

They are all coming from top schools…which I believe was a takeaway from this podcast.

Stripe nor meta pay thatch for entry level employees. Your kid needs a ton of training going into anthropic, you sound incredibly ignorant.

Sounds like you are crazy jealous. Both Meta and Stripe absolutely are hiring kids into various groups where they are paying these kinds of dollars. Anthropic is also hiring these kids who are coming from top schools…again with tons of skills and Math and CS degrees. They are paying PhDs over $1MM.

These kids are coming from top 10 schools.

I am literally just the messenger. You can decide to not believe it and continue to believe what you want.

You are a liar.

Folks…I don’t care if you don’t want to believe it. If it makes you feel better…so be it.