Slashdot Mirror
Gates On Future of CS Education
lilrowdy18 writes "In an interesting article from Eweek, Microsoft chairman and chief software architect Bill Gates talks about how the lack of spending in research and development is 'kind of a crime'. He also talks about future problems that are facing the computer industry including outsourcing and the speed of upcoming processors." From the article: "Microsoft taps both native-born talent and foreign talent, but Gates said he is frustrated that more U.S. students are not going into computer science. 'The fastest growing major is physical education,' he said. 'The Chinese are going to wake up and say we missed this opportunity,' he joked."
... perhaps it is because the modern CS students have just spent three years learning about operating systems by using open source operating systems?
Once upon a time you could make real money by working for a startup Microsoft. Today, it's just another job and all the cool ideas are coming out of Google.
How many of your Comp. Sci. peers got jobs before graduating from college? I know that only two of my fellow students did. How many business, accounting, education, and other students get jobs? Again, I don't know about your experience, but all my friends who chose not to major in Comp. Sci. did quite well and landed nice jobs BEFORE they got their diplomas.
Supply and demand. This is a no-fucking-brainer for students who go to college in order to get jobs and move on with their careers. Last time I checked, nobody wants to spend -- or waste -- for years of school in order to end up unemployed. There are tons of articles that describe newly minted CEOS who decide to hire and developm in India or China because it is cheaper. Kids read that and decide not to fall into the same hole as the previous generation.
Sorry Bill, not every students gets to be one of the wealthiest people on the planet. Software was hot in 80s. Now it is a freaking commodity. Let's move on.
You hit the nail on the head. When I was in college, my roomate who was a buisness major switched to computer science when he saw an article in US News and World Report which said that computer science majors would start at $40,000 a year. The only major that started higher was chemical engineering. Buisness was somewhere in the middle at $29,000 or so, with art at the bottom with $18,500.
Now people are avoiding computer science because there is no growth seen. There is percieved shrinkage in the USA. HP lays off 11,000. Sun fired 4,000 a few years ago. Who wants to work in an industry where they have no job security?
It is not like someone can get a degree in computer science, get a job at GE starting at $40,000, and work there the next 30 years and retire with a pension. Most comp sci people I know work on a contract basis. One year at a single company is considered a long time by some people. Then there is the pain in the ass of finding a new gig.
How does someone plan buying a house under those conditions? What do you tell the bank? Umm... I have had 5 different contracts the past 3 years.
Then there is the question of sanity. Who will live longer. They comp sci guy, who works 60 hour weeks, under stress, then even when he has no work, he is stressed looking for work. I see an early death due to heart attack. Or is it better to be a PE teacher, making $35,000 a year and spending time outdoors lobbing softballs and playing tennis?
The problem the comp sci students are going to face is the same problem the auto workers are facing. Companies don't give a crap about americans, even though the companies started in the USA, the CEO and board of directors are American, and they sell their product to Americans. They will move their factories and tech support and anything they can to Mexico or India or anywhere they can find cheap labor. The CEO's are pretty much trators and they are crapping on the USA.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
In my family, I have people who retired from GM as a factory worker, who still has enough money to buy a new car every 4 years.
Next door is a nurse who is retired. Same thing, she has new cars and has money.
When I was 19 I worked in a bookstore one year during college. One of the women who worked there part time was 60 years old and was a retired teacher. I asked he if she needed the money, thinking how sad that a 60 year old woman needs to work. She said she did not need any money, had more than enough, but she was lonely and wanted to be around people. Since she was a teacher, she loved books.
My friends dad was a truck driver, and he is retired, and living comfortably in a 4br 2.5bath house.
What two things do all these people have in common? An automotive factory worker, a teacher, a nurse, and a truck driver? They all started working in the 1960's and each and every one of them has a pension in addition to social security.
It is a shame when today, skilled workers are not gaurenteed a pension. There should be a law which says that anyone who puts in over 10 years sweat and work into a company will get some kind of pension from that company. Maybe a good rule would be for every year worked, the company must pay a pension of 2.5% of that years salary, adjusted for inflation. A 30 year career would yeild 75% of the that persons salary. Add in social security, and most can retire comfortably.
I wonder what has changed from the 1960's-80's and today. Why is it today most companies don't want to offer health insurance or pensions, or make people pay into their own private funds. What has changed? Companies could afford it back then, but today they outsource work, they close factories, and they don't want to pay workers. But the CEO's get HUGE bonuses, it is nowhere in line with the bonuses they got 30 years ago.
The only way to fix it is to pass new laws. No more outsourcing of jobs. All companies must have a pension package. No lay offs unless the union okay's it. And every company must have a union, or the workers must collectivly agree on pay and terms.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."