Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!amd!intelca!qantel!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020 From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.cse Subject: Re: Tom!!!! Message-ID: <924@gilbbs.UUCP> Date: Sat, 20-Sep-86 23:17:43 EDT Article-I.D.: gilbbs.924 Posted: Sat Sep 20 23:17:43 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 27-Sep-86 22:08:59 EDT References: <699@sdcc12.UUCP> <921@gilbbs.UUCP> Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA Lines: 109 I apologize to everyone, but the more I thought about it, the more irked I got. The follwing is a reply to a letter I received from Frank Bellucci. Mr. Bellucci's comments are denoted by >, mine are not. I just thought others might want to know more about Mr. Bellucci's frame of reference. > You just overload me with incredible insight! Thanks for straightening > me out! It's so great to see such a typical letter here in my box from > such a typical "theoretician"! > > You want to segregate society into you "bright" people and, of course, > those "stupid" programmers. That is *YOUR* statement, not mine. It doesn't even bear close resemblence to anything *I'VE* said. > I've got nothing against intelligent, computer philosophers, one of > which I am. I have only got something against "degreed theoreticians" > who think they are God's gift to the earth or something. Albert > Einstein flunked out of school, but this man was bright enough to > to discover amazing ideas without Harvard, Yale, or UCSD's EE department > or wherever you graduated from. The president of ADC, a multi-billion Funny, I don't recall claiming to be a graduate, or even a student, in a CS program. I am, in fact, not degreed in any field. I would like to complete my degree in CS someday, should I ever have both the time and the money. > dollar company, has only a high school degree. Steve Wasnyak (the > spelling is terrible, I know, I guess I'm stupid!) of Apple computer > had not even graduated before his fame. Countless others are in > the same boat. > > The point is, and you obviously missed it, is that you can be an > incredible computer scientist in the field by learning on your > own. You don't have to go to school to learn it. The best On the contrary, one cannot be a computer scientist at all without studying the theory of computation, higher mathematics, and some hardware, BY DEFINITION. Admittedly, it is possible for someone to study these topics without the benefit of a university. But to claim to be a computer scientist without having studied these topics is patently ridiculous. What you *MEAN* to say is that it is possible to be an incredible PROGRAMMER by learning on one's own. Indeed, this is true, though *MOST* people would be better advised to seek the assistance of a good programming school. > people I have ever met in the field agree. Shalom Halevy of > TRE electronics (PHD radar physics) told me "Frank, don't bother > getting advanced degrees. You are just wasting your time. You'll > never catch up to what you could have done on the job". Shalom > was one of the few theoreticians, along with Dr. Kenneth Bowles > of Telesoft, inc and designer of the UCSD p-system, who are not > among the "elitists" who think we should people without degrees > in the toilet because, without a degree, they are obviously > "stupid". (above correction: we should 'put' people ...) I don't make any such claims. I have made no typification of non-degreed persons as "stupid" (or in any other way inferior). Your self-doubt exhibits itself and betrays you. All *I* said was that the world needs both programmers *AND* computer scientists, and that within the context of the educational systems as they exist, that these two groups should be trained differently, as befits their differing roles in the computing world. > In conclusion, your letter was boring. I hope you achieve your > little segregated society of "programmers" and "degreed computer > theorists." A little power and ego mania trip now and then > is good for everybody I guess...... I don't know where (except for your vivid and twisted imagination) you keep coming up with these gems. Are you *SERIOUSLY* suggesting that those who would research the leading edge of theoretical computing should be trained in exactly the same fashion as those who would produce working software applications? Are you seriously suggesting that the world has no use for theoreticians? Are you seriously suggesting that *ALL* theoreticians are ego maniacs? You truly are a strange individual, Frank. I do note that you are associated with a university. Why is that, Frank? Aren't you afraid someone will accuse you of being an elitist? Won't those pesky academicians pollute your brain with useless learning and knowledge? Golly, Frank, you seem to be a hypocrite, on top of it all. I personally find it extremely difficult to believe much of anything you claim to have accomplished, friend. Your spelling and grammar are atrocious. And yes, that *DOES* prove something: programming, among other things, is the art of stating carefully devised algorithms in precisely tailored language in order to unambiguously instruct the machine to cause specifically delineated operations over chosen sets of data. If you can't even communicate effectively and unambiguously in your native language, how can you expect anyone to believe that you can successfully specify, implement and verify any non-trivial computer program? Moreover, you seem (on the basis of the postings and letters from you that *I* have read) incapable of maintaining a coherent pattern of thought, of stating a proposal or question in a coherent and logical fashion, and of analyzing even simple English for content. In other words, you are, or would appear to be, sir, a fraud. -- Disclaimer: Disclaimer? DISCLAIMER!? I don't need no stinking DISCLAIMER!!! tom keller "She's alive, ALIVE!" {ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020 (* we may not be big, but we're small! *)