Late Night Ponderings: Going for a MSc or MBA, is it worth it?

[Asher]

What is a "professional"? You can be a professional by studying a science...

[Wiglaf]

I am sorry to hear you were fired. Get an MBA, since it will still be useful when we run out of silicon and cannot use computers anymore.

[Kuciwalker]

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
I am sorry to hear you were fired. Get an MBA, since it will still be useful when we run out of silicon and cannot use computers anymore.

I'm not fired, I'm still gainfully employed. Just keeping my options open.

You've got 1 strike left before I boot you from the ticket.

[Wiglaf]

[Asher]

You're a regular Biden when you run your mouth.

[Japher]

Originally posted by snoopy369


I'd wonder that too, but at the same time it shocked me how low of scores are accepted into high MBA schools. That test is easy as **** if you study at least a little for it... a 750-770 is not that difficult to get if you work for it a bit and are a good test-taker. (Admittedly I'm a very good test taker, but still...) Yet most schools - even way up there - had ranges of like 670-750 (25%-75%) or something silly like that.

I got a 680, and I am an idiot... Hopefully that won't end up in Tehban's sig... Though I hadn't planned on going to Stanford, which I would put in the Ivy League of Business schools. Haas (Bezerkely) probably puts up competition in the Bay Area for MBA candidates. Stanford, and most business schools, look at whole packages and not just GPA/test scores. Az's background, especially since it's international, might be appealing to such an institution. If he could get in he should definitly pursue it.

don't sell yourself short

Stanford Averages 740 GMAT I think, and that's an average. I don't know the Median, but average always suggests that ppl do get in with lower.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Asher
What is a "professional"? You can be a professional by studying a science...

A professional refers to a lawyer, physician, or pharmacist etc. Scientists are not professionals since we are too few, too diverse, and (most importantly) have no regulating organization (which is why we are relatively badly paid and treated like **** for most of our careers).

[Asher]

Originally posted by SpencerH


A professional refers to a lawyer, physician, or pharmacist etc. Scientists are not professionals since we are too few, too diverse, and (most importantly) have no regulating organization (which is why we are relatively badly paid and treated like **** for most of our careers).

I'm still very confused. Are you referring to general science (biology, chemistry, physics, etc)? Computer science doesn't really fall into either category.

Although software engineering is now a discipline in many engineering groups in Canada and some states in the US...

[snoopy369]

A professional is someone who works for a living. Scientists are academics, who study things or otherwise increase the general knowledge but don't actually produce anything (directly or by managing people who do). Professionals are directly involved in producing a good or a service, and additionally requires substantial training (generally a college degree) to be defined as a 'professional'; ie, a factory worker isn't a 'professional' but a chemical engineer is. Yes, it's a dumb distinction, but there you are.

Computer Scientists are not professionals. Computer Programmers are (as are Software Engineers, Software Developers, or whatever else you want to call us). That's the difference...

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369
A professional is someone who works for a living.

Computer Scientists are not professionals. Computer Programmers are (as are Software Engineers, Software Developers, or whatever else you want to call us). That's the difference...

I'm having a hard time not throwing rocks at you for not comprehending what computer science is or who computer programmers are.

Since software engineering is a subset of computer science, I urge you to logically defend that statement.

Computer scientists can be professionals (in a capacity as a software engineering, architect, developer, etc) or they can be academics (in a capacity as a researcher, theoretical computer scientist, etc).

I'm a computer scientist, by definition, and I consider myself a professional for obvious reasons.

A computer scientist is a person that has acquired knowledge of computer science, the study of the theoretical foundations of information and computation and their application in computer systems.

Computer scientists typically work on the design of the software side of computer systems, versus the hardware side which computer engineers mainly focus on, although there is overlap. Computer scientists can work on, and research in, areas such as algorithm development and design, software engineering, information theory, database theory, computational complexity theory, human-computer interaction, computer programming, programming language theory, computer graphics, and computer vision.

[snoopy369]

I define "Computer Science" as "The academic pursuit regarding the advancement of computer programming or technology as a theoretical pursuit". It's Engineering if you're actually making anything. Certainly you get a BSc in Computer Science to become a software engineer, just as you get a BSc in Chemical Science in order to become a Chemical Engineer... but if you are a "Computer Scientist" you are studying theory, not doing/making things. Software Engineering is no more a subset of Computer Science than Electrical Engineering is a subset of Physics.

Thus, I consider you a Software Engineer, who has knowledge in Computer Science, but not actually pursuing a career in Computer Science (at the moment, anyway).

Your definition is mostly fine - the difference is in what you do with that knowledge. Researching what you do with computers is not the same as designing production software, which is where Software Engineer comes in.

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I define "Computer Science" as "The academic pursuit regarding the advancement of computer programming or technology as a theoretical pursuit". It's Engineering if you're actually making anything. Certainly you get a BSc in Computer Science to become a software engineer, just as you get a BSc in Chemical Science in order to become a Chemical Engineer

My SO is getting a BASc in Chemical Engineering, which is a very very different program from getting a BSc in Chemical Science and becoming a chemical engineer. In fact, it is illegal to call yourself a Chemical Engineer (at least in Canada) if all you have is a BSc in Chemistry or Chemical Science.

I'm not sure what that does to your pet theory.

... but if you are a "Computer Scientist" you are studying theory, not doing/making things. Software Engineering is no more a subset of Computer Science than Electrical Engineering is a subset of Physics.

Thus, I consider you a Software Engineer, who has knowledge in Computer Science, but not actually pursuing a career in Computer Science (at the moment, anyway).

We disagree on the terminology. Computer science is the study of computers, of which software development is a subset. That's the formal definition.

You colloquially use it to define theorists and academics only, which I do not consider to be correct...but whatever.

[snoopy369]

It does nothing to my theory ... Canada is stupid, therefore you can't use it as an example.

You're right, though, it's just a terminology difference ... I use it because I think there should be a term for what I consider computer scientist (someone who studies it at a theoretical level). To me, Scientists (generally) are always people studying 'why' and less 'how', while engineers are studying 'how' and 'what' - ie, what are we making today. I would never consider myself a scientist, even though I sometimes develop new ways of doing things; I am an engineer, a tinkerer, not a theorizer.

But at the end of the day I suppose it doesn't really matter I think the difference explains why he doesn't consider 'computer scientist' a professional, though - not because YOU aren't a professional, but because he doesn't consider CS to be your career (at the moment).

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369
It does nothing to my theory ... Canada is stupid, therefore you can't use it as an example.

You're right, though, it's just a terminology difference ... I use it because I think there should be a term for what I consider computer scientist (someone who studies it at a theoretical level).

They're called (wait for it)....Theoretical computer scientists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoretical_computer_science