I have a question about learning Computer Science if someone could help (OSSU)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the OSSU (Open Source Society University) course as a potential starting point for learning computer science. Participants explore the value and limitations of the course, share personal experiences with learning resources, and reflect on the evolution of computer technology over the decades.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses interest in studying computer science and asks if the OSSU course is a good starting point.
  • Another participant agrees that the OSSU course looks good but notes that it is not an accredited university course, suggesting it may not be as official as desired.
  • Several participants share books that were influential in their learning, including works by Marvin Minsky and Donald Knuth, with some noting that these texts remain relevant despite their age.
  • There is a discussion about the historical context of learning programming, with participants recalling experiences of using FORTRAN and punch cards in the past.
  • Some participants discuss the transition from older computing technologies to modern computers, reflecting on how foundational concepts in computer science have persisted despite technological advancements.
  • One participant mentions the quick sort algorithm as an example of a concept that has remained unchanged, while noting that modern computers execute it significantly faster than older machines.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the relevance of foundational concepts in computer science, but there are differing views on the value and recognition of the OSSU course. The discussion includes both personal anecdotes and technical insights, indicating a mix of agreement and differing perspectives on the evolution of technology.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the limitations of older texts in the context of modern technology, while others emphasize that the underlying theories have not changed significantly. The discussion reflects a range of experiences and opinions regarding the transition from older computing methods to contemporary practices.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in self-directed learning in computer science, particularly those considering non-traditional educational resources like OSSU, as well as those curious about the historical context of computing technologies.

dawezz
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
Im 14 years old and in the future I want to study computer science, I have found the OSSU course, it would be a good start?Thanks
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
dawezz said:
Im 14 years old and in the future I want to study computer science, I have found the OSSU course, it would be a good start?
Looks good!
 
You should be aware that the OSSU course is not accredited as a university course. It might be a good way to learn CS but it might not be as official as you will want.
 
This book was part of my learning: http://www.cba.mit.edu/events/03.11.ASE/docs/Minsky.pdf

1651852555723.png


Other books in the Prentice-Hall Series, and other books at the library in QA 75 and QA 76, were good too ##-## especially (author/originator of ##\TeX##) Professor Don Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming ##-## available at: https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/taocp.html ##\leftarrow## (that's rather advanced).
 
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
DaveC426913 said:
Umm. That book was first published when state-of-the-art was this:
View attachment 301103

:oldbiggrin:
True, but the foundational concepts in computer science elucidated by MIT Professor Marvin Minsky in that book and others remain valid, even for today's much more advanced technology.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
DaveC426913 said:
Umm. That book was first published when state-of-the-art was this:
View attachment 301103

:oldbiggrin:
I started my research as a physics graduate student writing FORTRAN code for one of those, but that was 45 years ago. :eek:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveC426913
jtbell said:
I started my research as a physics graduate student writing FORTRAN code for one of those, but that was 45 years ago. :eek:
40 years ago, in Grade 11, I was writing FORTRAN on punch cards and taking the subway downtown to the university on a Sunday to put my program in the stack for the mainframe.
 
DaveC426913 said:
40 years ago, in Grade 11, I was writing FORTRAN on punch cards and taking the subway downtown to the university on a Sunday to put my program in the stack for the mainframe.
Forty years ago, and in grade 11 ? An indication maybe that modern technology was expensive back then.
 
  • #10
symbolipoint said:
Forty years ago, and in grade 11 ? An indication maybe that modern technology was expensive back then.
You mean, why did I have to go downtown to find a punch card processor in 1980?
Yeah, I think by the time I graduated, they'd started putting in actual PCs in my HS.
 
  • #11
DaveC426913 said:
You mean, why did I have to go downtown to find a punch card processor in 1980?
Yeah, I think by the time I graduated, they'd started putting in actual PCs in my HS.
This makes me a little curious what were the transition years range?
 
  • #12
symbolipoint said:
This makes me a little curious what were the transition years range?
When I was a freshman in university in Northern California around 1975-76, my FORTRAN class used the same punched cards and a reader to load the programs into the (big Burroughs B6700) mainframe. By the end of that school year in 1976 they started to have some shared terminals where you could type your programs in and save them to print out at the mainframe.
 
  • #13
symbolipoint said:
This makes me a little curious what were the transition years range?
Of me? Or of the computers?
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #14
DaveC426913 said:
Of me? Or of the computers?
I meant, of the computers; the technology and the practices; using the cards or using digital(?) computers.
 
  • #16
valenumr said:
So was: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Computer_Programming

A lot has changed, but the fundamentals, not a lot. I wish I could grok quantum computing though. That's the leap right now.
I apologize for missing the context. Knuth was mentioned, but I skimmed passed it. He is exceptionally good at fundamentals, but there have been a lot of incremental changes since.

We put men on the moon in that era with that technology, and it is still highly relevant today.
 
  • #17
The mathematical theory behind computer software is the same for the last 60-70 years. It is just the technology that allows to build smaller, faster, more reliable computer, but based on the same theory. Of course the theory about the hardware changed a lot the last 60-70 years.

For example, the quick sort algorithm is known from the 1950s and has complexity ##O(nlogn)##. However this same algorithm can run up to 1000000 faster if run on a modern computer than on a computer of the 1960s because each of the nlogn steps of the algorithm takes smaller time in modern computers. But it is the same number of steps in both cases.

P.S I reckon the basic theory about computer hardware hasn't changed a lot either. Just the theory regarding the technology on how to make smaller transistors with faster frequency. In sort Larger scale of integration and faster frequency is what is essentially different in a modern computer than that of the 60s.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K