What is the utility of computer scientists?

[Not The Real JReg]

sO yOu AdMiT tHaT cOmPuTeR sCiEnCe Is EaSy

Are you mocking me?

[teo123]

I disagree. However, it is my understanding that you are not allowed to discuss hard sciences and soft sciences, so you will just have to accept that I am right and you are wrong.

Is that how you defend your arguments?

Well Teo isn't allowed to discuss it, to @JReg's credit.

I think EquALLity meant that that's not even remotely a logically sound argument.

[teo123]

Back then, it was a masterpiece that took many months to program. These days, thanks to computer science, you can make it in a day after a few weeks of studying JavaScript (assuming you are already familiar with basic programming). I know that, because I did it a few years ago.

So you admit that computer science is easy.

Er... No, I am saying that programming PacMan is relatively easy these days because computer scientists have done the hard work of designing the languages and the runtime environments.

[Not The Real JReg]

Er... No, I am saying that programming PacMan is relatively easy these days because computer scientists have done the hard work of designing the languages and the runtime environments.

Yes, fine, programming Pac-Man is relatively easy, and you can talk until the cows come home about computer scientists doing the "hard work" of designing the languages and the runtime environments, but that doesn't mean anything compared to the actual hard work of having a vision to create Pac-Man. This is what angers me about many computer scientists. They have no actual vision for the future, and when somebody actually does have a vision, they're happy to trample all over it. Pac-Man is a work of art and so many computer scientists want to dismiss it as "just a game", and be all like "we can do that easily". You know what? What you're doing is the equivalent of me writing down the complete works of Shakespeare. I can whine about my arm aching as much as I like, but the man who is doing the hard stuff is Shakespeare. Nobody who copies out the works of Shakespeare can ever claim to be his equivalent, and nobody who programs a new game of Pac-Man can never claim to be the equivalent of Toru Iwatani. And nobody can ever claim that either Pac-Man or the complete works of Shakespeare aren't masterpieces!

By the way, I visited your website. You have removed the heart and soul from Pac-Man. Blinky, Pinky, Inky and Clyde don't even have eyes in your version. It's like painting the smile off of the Mona Lisa.

[EquALLity]

> social sciences and humanities are useless
> pacman is a WoRk Of ArT

jreg ladies and gentlemen

[Not The Real JReg]

> social sciences and humanities are useless
> pacman is a WoRk Of ArT

jreg ladies and gentlemen

Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.

You're just not as smart as me.

[EquALLity]

> social sciences and humanities are useless
> pacman is a WoRk Of ArT

jreg ladies and gentlemen

Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.

You're just not as smart as me.

don't get it

[Not The Real JReg]

> social sciences and humanities are useless
> pacman is a WoRk Of ArT

jreg ladies and gentlemen

Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.

You're just not as smart as me.

don't get it

Your ignorance and stupidity are in their own respective accords unfathomably palpable; So palpable in fact that you can cut it with a knife. Yet, this palpability of ignorance and stupidity is unprecedented in my experiences (and trust me, I have had many). This does not merely require a knife, it requires the abilities of the greatest swordsmen in both fiction and non to merge their skills 500 fold, while equipped with the sharpest tool available to humanity. However, when the two (being ignorance an stupidity, as I am sure you have forgotten by now) merge, it requires the blade of the most refined steel, refined for no less than 200 years consecutively.

Small minds will never improve; they remain stagnant in their state due to the lack of a desire to improve.

[EquALLity]

Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.

You're just not as smart as me.

don't get it

Your ignorance and stupidity are in their own respective accords unfathomably palpable; So palpable in fact that you can cut it with a knife. Yet, this palpability of ignorance and stupidity is unprecedented in my experiences (and trust me, I have had many). This does not merely require a knife, it requires the abilities of the greatest swordsmen in both fiction and non to merge their skills 500 fold, while equipped with the sharpest tool available to humanity. However, when the two (being ignorance an stupidity, as I am sure you have forgotten by now) merge, it requires the blade of the most refined steel, refined for no less than 200 years consecutively.

Small minds will never improve; they remain stagnant in their state due to the lack of a desire to improve.

you are right

[teo123]

Er... No, I am saying that programming PacMan is relatively easy these days because computer scientists have done the hard work of designing the languages and the runtime environments.

Yes, fine, programming Pac-Man is relatively easy, and you can talk until the cows come home about computer scientists doing the "hard work" of designing the languages and the runtime environments, but that doesn't mean anything compared to the actual hard work of having a vision to create Pac-Man. This is what angers me about many computer scientists. They have no actual vision for the future, and when somebody actually does have a vision, they're happy to trample all over it. Pac-Man is a work of art and so many computer scientists want to dismiss it as "just a game", and be all like "we can do that easily". You know what? What you're doing is the equivalent of me writing down the complete works of Shakespeare. I can whine about my arm aching as much as I like, but the man who is doing the hard stuff is Shakespeare. Nobody who copies out the works of Shakespeare can ever claim to be his equivalent, and nobody who programs a new game of Pac-Man can never claim to be the equivalent of Toru Iwatani. And nobody can ever claim that either Pac-Man or the complete works of Shakespeare aren't masterpieces!

By the way, I visited your website. You have removed the heart and soul from Pac-Man. Blinky, Pinky, Inky and Clyde don't even have eyes in your version. It's like painting the smile off of the Mona Lisa.

Ideas for computer games (or almost any kind of program) are abundant.
Ideas about what should be made are usually worthless. Because, first of all, you can't really know if something is a good idea until somebody realizes it. Even then it can be hard to tell, yet alone before. I came up with an idea for and developed a flashcard game about linguistics. Is it worth to continue developing it? Who knows?
Ideas about how things should be done in programs are worth a lot more. To come up with them, you need to have done a lot of research. To come up with a demonstrably efficient sorting algorithm, you need to read a lot about it and do a lot of measurements, and you need to have some luck for the idea you come up with to really be good. They are perhaps about as important as the actual programs and games are, since those ideas can be reused if you ever end up with a similar problem.
But programming languages and runtime environments which make you run into fewer problems while you make programs, those stuff is worth far more.