What will computer science be like hundred years from now?
Predictions:
>someone will prove that P != NP
>quantum computing will remain academically interesting for decades but will prove too difficult to find more than a few niche commercial applications
>security will still be a bloody disaster
Look at what CS looked like 50 years ago
Essentially the same
>>53014228
We'll still use C
The year of Linux desktop is still yet to come
Windows 50 will require 2 petabytes of ram to boot
X86 will still be the most widely used architecture
>>53014228
It depends heavily on if free or propriety software wins the war.
You can't see a science, idiot.
>>53014228
Computers will have peaked and natural computing will be the core of the science.
Predictions:
>Global Economic crisis continues
>Overpopulation and famine
>Third world war and nuclear apocalypses
There won't be any CS a hundred years from now.
>>53014556
Only your first is is computer science dawg. Ok maybe windows RAM usage is computer science related, the other are irrelevant. I hope by then Linux tards come together to make two to three MAX desktop distros that are amazing as opposed to a million half assed ones.
>>53014556
This is the future you chose /g/
>>53014556
>bunch of engineering shit
god you fucking ITT tech shitheads really gotta google what "computer science" is
![180px-No_computer_no_science[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/iPCAtik.png "180px-No_computer_no_science[1].png")
>>53015118
There is no such thing as computer science
>trying to predict the future
That's like trying to stop posting on 4chan.
>>53014228
Like your mom.
Open and buggy.
It's an app :^)
As mathematics curriculum incorporate more and more computational courses, computer science should merge back with mathematics, as the overlap between the two is larger than their differences.
Unless US universities continue down their current path, in which case computer science will be amalgamated with even more meaningless sub-specialties at the undergraduate level so everyone can feel like they are extra special with their highfalutin degree name.
>>53015236
The guy in your pic is most likely teaching web design or some shit.
Our prof actually started the first lesson by making clear that this has nothing to with science but more with art, and its not about "programming" but designing, so he crossed out the "computer" part aswell for some reason.
>>53014393
>We'll prove P == NP
>Silicon chips will be ancient dinosaur trash
>Most chips will be made of that graphite shit
>We'll finally have NLP down (sexting bots and Visual Novels from japan will take advantage of this more than the rest of the world)
>Strong AI will be within reach
>Little bitch ass kids who don,t know whit wont believe me when I tell them cars used to need people to drive them
>The list of games people can beat computers at will be much smaller (Chess and Go wont be on that list)
>Half-Life 3 still wont be out
>>53014228
>What will computer science be like hundred years from now?
star trek
Singularity is within 100 years.
>>53014393
>>quantum computing will remain academically interesting for decades but will prove too difficult to find more than a few niche commercial applications
In 100 years?
>>53015427
>Oh and the world will basically be two groups of people, normies who hate CS/CSE bros because of all the normie jobs computers will take, CS/CSE bros (Having said that CS rules CSE drools lmao owned ngr fgts)
>>53015420
>Doesn't know who professor is.
>RUH ROH SHAGGY.jpg
>>53015420
>The guy in your pic is most likely teaching web design or some shit.
Kek
>>53015420
That "guy" is Harold Abelson, in the middle of an MIT computer science lecture. He was discussing how the name "computer science" is misleading because it references the tools you use rather than the study itself, and I don't remember why its not science but don't question Hal
>>53015420
>The guy in your pic is most likely teaching web design or some shit.
>>53015593
>that random wankel round triangle thing
whut
I get the Twingo and Mazda 3, they look smug as shit
but the fucks up with the wanker?
>>53015467
Yes. Shit's difficult, and we don't even know whether it's possible to entangle the number of qubits you'd need to do interesting things.
>>53015673
But 100 years?
I mean
100 years ago a computer was a person's job title
>>53015694
Exponential growth does not go on forever. Eventually, it stops. We've just gotten awfully used to it because we were born and raised in an era where Moore's Law held. Every such trend eventually levels off.
http://strawpoll.me/6837351/
http://strawpoll.me/6837351/
http://strawpoll.me/6837351/
When will the Singularity happen, if ever?
It will be even more dumbed down than today probably
>>53014228
still incomplete TAOCP. I kid; we love you knuth, may your magnum opus live for centuries, and thanks for TeX
>>53017601
Is there any reason to use TeX in 2016?
>>53015458
I hope it's automated in 100 years. Otherwise each generation will have proved itself incredibly lazy
ternary
>>53019089
There was never a reason to use Tex since troff existed.
>>53015628
muh rotary
>>53014228
In 100 years from now, the vast majority of people will be sitting on their ass hooked up with implanted brain electrodes for "virtual reality". Every once in a while someone from Amazon will show up to make sure that everyones glucose feed is operating properly. All tasks that don't contribute directly to physical infrastructure will be completed in the virtual world merely by thought. Those who work in the physical world will be paid much more, but will be left out of the mainstream "reality".
>>53020207
>Those who work in the physical world will be paid much more, but will be left out of the mainstream "reality".
They can work in shifts.
>>53015532
>>53015420
"[Computer science] is not really about computers -- and it's not about computers in the same sense that physics is not really about particle accelerators, and biology is not about microscopes and Petri dishes...and geometry isn't really about using surveying instruments. Now the reason that we think computer science is about computers is pretty much the same reason that the Egyptians thought geometry was about surveying instruments: when some field is just getting started and you don't really understand it very well, it's very easy to confuse the essence of what you're doing with the tools that you use."
-Hal Abelson,Class of 1992 Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the MIT
>>53019089
Most conferences and journals provide a cls file that lets you instantly and painlessly format your paper to their specification. Obsessing over fiddly little shit in MS Word for hours to appease some editor would be hellish; instead you just change one line of code and recompile.
>>53015420
>nothing to with science but more with art
Art is he application of science.
>>53020518
No it isn't. They're entirely unrelated, though they can be done together.
>>53020536
>"Science" may refer to any knowledge which has been reduced to an algorithmic system
Depends on what context science is used in it can refer to either the natural sciences, or merely knowledge.
scientific knowledge is defined entirely by your epistemological system of choice. apparently this is too difficult to grasp even though it's taught in plenty of popsci.
>>53014228
Probably heavily focused on quantum computers.
Id ending in 55 get
>>53020403
What's that mean? I'm almost done with a CS degree and it seems that CS is just a way to organize and process patterns and/or signals and looking for the most efficient way to do this. It also has to do with designing machines that can process the patterns or signals.
It's just more theoretical than say EE or CompE. It really should have more hardware design in it. The fact that I had to take 2 semesters of general physics but only one real hardware class is stupid. Also chemistry? Why?
>>53021233
Chemisty's a general requirement, kind of like english classes.
>>53014228
A high school subject
>>53015427
graphene* you eager beaver
But if you're worried about job prospects as a CS grad, you probably didn't do your best in school.
>>53014556
>2 petabytes of ram to boot
>>53015420
>Not knowing SICP videos
You shouldn't be on /g/
Everyone will be running TempleOS, because it's designed to last 1000 years.
>>53015236
Good video.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2Op3QLzMgSY
>>53021954
That's just the bootloader.
>>53019089
It runs fine on ancient hardware, or alternatly on modern custom hardware (FPGA or even a frankenstein system using older components and chips). So that means you can escape the botnet, because all modern consumer class hardware is botnet at the microcode and firmware levels.
>>53015458
If singularity happens within my life time I might actually become a terrorist and attempt to keep humanity from dieing off
>>53014228
After WWIII
>>53022780
>Everyone will be running TempleOS, because it's designed to last 1000 years.
All intel chips would have a copy of TempleOS baked into the microprocessor itself
>>53022780
what is the point of temple os, and does everyone understand it was written by a crazy person?
>>53014556
programs moving towards less space efficient yet more time efficient implementations is really making the best possible use of what technologies we currently have. I can imagine memory getting faster and cheaper, but some tasks dont parallelize well, and there will always be problems with TDP.
>>53023523
It's meant to be like a modern Commodore 64. Like instead of having a big, complicated OS in the way, you just do wtf you want.
>>53014393
Quantum will remain 10 years away, forever.
Much like fusion.
100 years is a bit hard to guess, given the subject is no 100 years old.
I hope for a nice language on the base of Homotopy Type Theory within 5 years.
