Slashdot Mirror
Interesting Computer Science Jobs?
mattskent writes "I'm currently a junior in college working towards my Bachelor's degree in Computer Science. As such, I'm starting to look pretty seriously at jobs in the IT/Computer Science field. I've spent plenty of time working entry-level IT jobs doing various kinds of help desk type work, and so most of the exposure I've had to the field is related to support of other people's computers. I enjoy helping other people out, but I'd rather not be plugging things in and restarting computers the rest of my life. Although the possibility is growing on me, I don't think I would particularly love to write code all day for a living either. What are some interesting jobs that you've had or heard of that I could look into fresh out of college with a Computer Science degree?"
Let's see. You'll get a CS degree but don't feel like writing code for a living. That's a tough one.
Are you a "people" person? All those introverted geeks need to talk to each other, make decisions and agree on stuff. Something that they (on average) do very poorly. You would have a career in product marketing, since you understand the geeks and can talk to them.
If that makes sense to you, then short-term, your best bet is to join an open source project and volunteer to *organize* stuff. Not code, but organize. You'd be amazed how badly needed it is for most projects.
--
the elephant in the room: How to Make Money with Open Source?
If you're any good, you'll spend a lot more time understanding problems, designing solutions and finding good techniques for factoring code. If you do nothing but "write code all day", you're a shitty developer.
Don't become a sysadmin.
Most people go for CS degrees because they want to work in IT, or write code.
You may want to take a step back, figure out what you *do* want to do with the rest of your life, and switch majors.
Gonna save some people some time here
CS is no more about computers than astronomy is about Telescopes.
There are many accomplished IT admins who use their CS knowledge on a daily basis, I am one of them.
CS is not Coding.
CS is more about Math.
If you want to stay pure CS you need to find R&D departments or go for your PHD.
CS is a great degree but isn't going to get you far when getting a job because most managers don't understand its purpose.
Find out what you love doing and do it, chances are, CS prepared you to do that thing.
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
I'll tell you what, no matter what job you are working, it's still going to be a job. I like my job, I get to figure stuff out, I try new technologies all the time, but at the end of the day I am still doing it because I need to pay the bills (eat, rent, etc). There's always going to be an element of misery (dealing with coworkers, getting up in the morning when I'd rather sit at home and play Smash Brothers, debugging......that's a big one. Can't finish your code without debugging it).
Working isn't about 'fun' or 'entertainment' or 'what I want to do.' If you really want to work, then something is strange about you. Working is about surviving in a cold hard miserable world, it's about being self-sufficient, it's about producing something of value. Those all feel good, but you aren't working to have fun (even though work can be fun sometimes!), you are working to survive.
Don't confuse work with your dreams.........what do you REALLY want to do? Only in rare people is it something you can make money doing. Do you want to help starving children in Africa? Be a beach bum? Travel the world? Live the life of an eternal frat boy? Get married and live a quiet life? Whatever it is, focus on that, and your job will help you with it. Otherwise, if you make your job your life, it will just weigh you down and make you miserable. Work sucks, but you can still be happy. Life sucks, but you can still have fun.
That's my advice. YMMV
Qxe4
..and that is IT technician at a call center. at least the company i work for, i am solely responsible for keeping 500 pc's, all associated switches and servers etc up and running - and i am surrounded by people with double digit iq's - or to put it another way, i'm astonished that i havent brought my kalashnikov to work yet. almost anything is less stressful than dealing with hundereds of idiots that cant figure out that a mouse wont work if it isnt plugged in, or elderly hillbilly management from oklahoma that thinks thousands of dollars worth of equipment grows on electric trees, and that months of work can be done in 2 days. i hope they fuckin fire me. at least then ill be able to look for another job and still have a govt check to pay rent while i do so.
I just got my BS in CS in May and have been writing code all day for the last 4 months. It's really not bad (at least where I work) and it's nowhere near as difficult as doing real CS. CS homework is hard, but implementing business rules after you already "get" CS is no problem.
One thing to keep in mind when job hunting is that recruiters don't know what they're looking for in a developer. They ask for all kinds of scary qualifications that don't mean shit. Bluff your way through a phone screening and keep in mind that 9 out of 10 people they're interviewing can't write a simple factorial function, let alone do it recursively.
If you've never used a relational database before, learn about those. It's not difficult, but you need to know about it because you will use it.
Not that you'll read this, but from my own (similar) experience, you will have a more rewarding career with a better company than with a "better job." Get a list of good companies (like the Fortune 100) and start at the top and work your way down. The way companies treat their employees will affect your happiness level much more than whatever it is you actually do for them.
As a professional developer with about a decade of commercial experience, I can assure you that you won't be writing code all day in many jobs. You'll spend at least half your time writing TPS report coversheets, attending meetings, writing reports about attending meetings, attending meetings about reports, and occasionally meetings about meetings or reports about reports. Figuring out how to answer the latest hare-brained question from the suits with the shitty data to hand (abortions of SQL and/or one-off hacks with a scripting language go here) takes up another twenty-five percent of your time. Twenty percent to thinking about lunch, eye-balling the hot MOTAS in Accounting or HR, sneaking in the side entrance so Lumbergh doesn't see you, and you're looking at five percent of your time going to real actual coding/work.
You may think I'm pulling your leg, and you also probably laugh rather than cry when you read Dilbert. Don't worry, by the time you graduate you'll probably be old enough to legally drink and that really helps take the edge off.
Hope that helps! :D
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
Working isn't about 'fun' or 'entertainment' or 'what I want to do.'
It isn't? It sure is for me. At least "What I want to do". Sometimes it's not fun or entertainment but those are very different things. Anything else is putting yourself in a cage 50 hours a week, a cage for which you have the key but few people chose to leave.
I don't even think it's all that rare or hard to be able to do "what you want to do". The hard part is figuring out what that is... but if you think you know that should be at the TOP of the list of things to look for in a job.
Also consider that thinking that companies are the only source of jobs, is a great way to limit your options and your own potential. Leave nothing out including the prospect of starting your own company.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just make sure you work as an "apprentice" for a good 3-5 years. Nothing worse than coming across a guy who developed his/her own way of doing everything. You will be way ahead of the curve in the parent's areas if you learn from someone who has been around the block a couple times. You will learn much faster, and become a much better admin in any of those areas. You will also have a much smoother career (fewer headaches from learning experiences).
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
Exactly. If you really enjoy computing, but have found the industry isn't what the hobby was, and you're a people person (which it sounds like you are), then you might enjoy a different application of your skills, like teaching IT (or even teaching math). But for god's sake, get out of the subject altogether, if it doesn't interest you. Sometimes it's hard enough to enjoy when you have a passion for it.
Although we don't need any more of them, the answer to your question is the Project Manager path to IT management.
You would add a PMP certification and for fast track an MBA, then talk enough Java buzzwords to get by. Being able to prototype Windows screens with VB or C#, lay out web pages, and SQL query databases like your problem log will make you a star.
Before you know it you'll be a CIO.
rd
I have been writing software since the 1970s, and there isn't much left in the field for "work." There may be "research," into things but the average "job" is tedium.
"Computer Science" as it were, is nothing more than a craftsman tool belt. There is no "science" left. It is all the fashion of end-user application. Web sites, social networks, e-commerce, etc. No one in the field is producing great work (and making great money) any more.
I've been interviewing candidates for the last 15 years and "computer science" is a joke. The universities are teaching a trade, not a science. Kids barely understand the mathematical basics of how a hash table works. Don't even get me started on twos-compliment arithmetic or how to evaluate algorithms.
Sure, the desktop processors and environments do a lot for you, but maybe you'll want to do something interesting some day with different types of devices like PICs.
In the end, you'll have to learn about something else, like banking, medicine, civil engineering, accounting or some such to be able to write software for those fields, but since those fields currenly pay better, why not go there first?
Coding should not be more than 30% of a job. We need people than can read specifications, turn them into requirements, design an architecture, model solutions, code, integrate, document, and debug. I am sorry, but the talented and rewarded people are the ones that can do it all. The ones that can't code and prefer to administer systems are the easiest to replace.
Where I work, we do embedded software that runs close the hardware, operates in critical environments, must work every time, run for years, and be secure. The guys I give the highest performance ratings (raises) to are the ones that can design, code, re-use code, and solve problems.
I haven't coded in 5 years and miss it, so I came up with a project for home to keep me current and have fun with. I can see not wanting to do it 8 hours a day, but any true CS geek deep down enjoys it like solving puzzles and playing games. Coding is problem solving. It should be enjoyed and done well or not at all.
First and foremost: DO NOT ACCEPT CAREER JOBS YOU WILL NOT ENJOY. I made the mistake of grabbing a VisualBasic 6 job when I'm a Linux and C++ guy. Now I've 4 years experience (3 in VB6+DB2, 1 in Linux/KSH scripting + Netezza Database warehouse) and I'm having a VERY tough time using that experience to land anything that I might actually enjoy. Your first couple of jobs define the path of your career in both the short and mid-term which then makes it easier to steer it the way you want in the long-term.
I suggest a sys-admin role. In the right place, you'll do some shell scripting, update hardware and (politely) smack the occasional end user. I'll let others speak on this as I've only seen it from a distance and don't have much hands-on with it.
Another possibility (and I REALLY really hate to suggest this, although it might be better suited to you than me) is go into a consulting firm under the Consultant or Solutions workforce. As a consultant, you'll do some paper pushing (eventually you'll help design how major, high volume applications) and some coding. As a Solutions Consultant, you'll be mostly coding.
The advantage of both types of consulting positions is that you'll do something for 6-12mo. and move on to a new project. The disadvantage to both is you'll find yourself with twice the number of bosses (Office space, anyone?). One set of bosses for The Client and another for Your Consulting Company. Personally, this drives me crazy. Also, you don't get a whole lot of say on what client you'll be working for which can be a big problem (e.g. non-smokers working for a major tobacco company ... nothing like your boss lighting a stogie in a meeting).
As a Consultant, you'll have to travel (plus or minus, depending) and make quite a bit of money. On the flip side, you'll have longer hours and more stress.
As a Solutions Consultant, you'll have less stress and it'll be easier to stay at home, but you won't make as much.
My final suggestion is Application Support. You'll do a little coding, a little debugging, interact with users who are knowledgeable about how the process should REALLY work (assuming the organization is well structured) and get the occasional amusing service ticket like, "Have the magical elves in APP-land fix the claim again."
And I've found that system administrators who have not developed significant programming experience also have difficulty with basic system administration concepts. The most basic of these is that any system is a particular instance of a certain class. System administration amounts to maintaining a code base written in an ultra high level object language. That's if you're competent.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
They'll have to lobotomize you, of course, on the off chance any useful knowledge has been imparted to you in the past couple years, but that's SOP for an MBA anyway, and the fat paycheck generates no complaints. Moreover the lobotomy will insure that you don't need to worry about whether the work is interesting or even useful.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Unfortunately most Computer Science degrees these days are at least half IT. If you do not understand the following sentence then you probably did not really get an education in Computer Science:
Computer science does not require a computer.
I can't quite figure out how to reply to this without sounding snarky towards the parent, who clearly has a different view of the field than I do and who am I to say which view is right? But feel I need to say- we're NOT that desperate anymore. The boom in bioinformatics was about 10 years ago now (pause while I shudder at realization that I have been out of grad school for that long....) I work in this area, and have since leaving grad school. When I graduated in 1999, there weren't really any bioinformatics grad programs, and the field was populated by a mix of biologists learning computers, computer types learning biology, and some physicists. Now, there are plenty of grad programs churning our bioinformatics MS and even PhD graduates. The only people I know working in bioinformatics w/o some serious bio background now have either been at it for many, many years or are pretty much pure coders.
However, as one of the previous replies said- there is a career to be made by being the interface between a specialized customer set (in this case, biologists) and the software developers. I've done that quite a bit, and have managed to keep myself employed. But you need to have credibility on both sides- which means a strong bio background (an advanced degree helps) AND an understanding of how software development works (it helps if you've coded).
You could also look at project management. Lots of folks laugh at project managers, but that is usually because they've never worked with a good project manager. Once again, though, I think it helps if you've done some coding, both for credibility with the team and so that you can make reasonable estimates about how long development tasks will take, etc.
Be aware that there's a funding treadmill to jobs at national agencies. If your current president goes off to a protracted and expensive war, you just may find your funding getting rather thin.
Not only is it excruciatingly condescending, it's quite wrong, even if a computer scientist was the one who originally uttered it. Computer science is very damn well about computers because there would be no computer science if you took away the computer.
It's not wrong. It's substantially correct, even if Dijkstra takes a little license by introducing a bit of hyperbole. He *didn't* say computers have no place in computer science or anything ridiculous like that. He's explaining, roughly, that actual computers are really only tools and that the concrete tools themselves do not encompass the field of computation.
Of course, that changes if your definition of "computer" is wide enough to include, say, something between its original meaning and the entire universe in which we live. And having a rather application-oriented viewpoint, I do think the concrete tools are one of the most interesting part of the field. But I also think Dijkstra's comment is extremely useful for performing perspective inversions among people who haven't understood the field is wider and deeper than the conventional set of Von Neumman architectures we've managed to make so far.
If there were no digital processors, data storage, or networks, there would be no reason to develop solutions to problems that are unique to information systems alone. No reason for someone to sit around all day dreaming up the optimal programming language for a given application. No reason for teams of graduate students to work tirelessly in search of the best human-computer interface.
As it turns out, the field is bigger than these things too: even if you eliminated every last one of these things, theoretical computation would probably remain interesting to some people, and indeed, you can find a significant amount of theoretical work done back before most of these things existed in digital form.
I'll agree that there's a great (almost overwhelming) amount of math in studying the theory of computer science, but you can't honestly say that a computer science graduate is merely just some sort of specialized mathematician and leave it at that.
As a Math grad and a programmer of 20+ years, I'd agree that CS is best served as a separate discipline drawing from mathematics, physics, chemistry, EE, and more. And yet you could in fact devote yourself entirely to studying specialized mathematics, never writing a single line of code, and still be working in computer science.
It doesn't do justice to those in the field and it misinforms those who don't understand what the field is all about.
I'd agree it's hard to do the entire field justice in a single sentence, but far from bounding it badly, this phrase invites people to look outside of preconceptions about the field and potentially see something beyond the boxes and screens on their desks.
Tweet, tweet.
Hey mattskent, welcome to the field. I'm 43 yo, been working this field all my life, and I have good news and bad news for you: the good, as others have pointed out, is that there's a big range of things you could be working on.
You don't have to develop all the time or to do support all the time. I've done a lot of those things myself, from crawling under people's desks to developing (not in the programming sense) products for my own company. The bad: you will always be doing some amount of support (and coding for that matter). Can't get away from it.
At entry levels, it's just expected. As you move upwards on the ladder -- and if you're any good -- there will be things only a very few people understand and you're one of them, in each case you will have no choice but to do some support, just because there are not a lot of people who can actually do it at that level.
This has led me to realize that ALL CS jobs are somehow related to support because the machines, programs and systems we create/develop/program are actually there to perform some work for somebody else, who usually knows a lot about that work but not necessarily about the machines they use.
AFAIK there's only one way out: get a PhD and become a researcher. That's the only way you will eventually get payed to play with computers, which is what most of us want when we pick CS as a major. But then you'll be required to teach also, which wouldn't work for me.
As I said earlier, welcome to the field...
On this line of thinking, any deep knowledge in a niche area can be very useful. ...and incredibly risky. The idea with a double major is to REDUCE your industry risk, not increase it. It may not feel like it, but your decision of your career direction is one of the riskiest decisions you will make. You have no real control over whether your industry will grow, disappear altogether, be outsourced, become obsolete, see demand drop due to economic forces, be legislated into oblivion, be taken over by the government, be disadvantaged by the tax code, etc.
Not to get philosophical, but capitalism requires agility. It requires businesses to fail, industries to disappear, jobs to be outsourced, etc. And it requires you to be able to switch gears. I think we would ALL be much better off if everyone assumed that one or more career switches in their lives is a very real likelihood.
Capitalism is not very compassionate to the minority of individuals. Some people lose their jobs to India; some people end up making less than they did before; some people have to change jobs to something they enjoy less. At some point, we did understand that these unfortunate realities are necessary to advance the economy as a whole and improve the average standard of living for the community, nation, and world.
I say this as a double major myself. I studied Systems Analysis and Neuroscience. My approach was to study things I was very interested in, NOT to find a profitable intersection that may or may not be there when I graduate (and believe me, most people who asked me about my choice in majors had a hard time understanding this and did not agree with my approach).