📖 The Art of Doing Science and Engineering - Learning to Learn

Synopsis

Thoughts

Chapter 1

Chapter one is predominantly a discussion of the difference between education and training, with the aim of the book to be to educate rather than train. It posits that each go hand in hand with one another, but often there are gaps in many courses that are overlooked as they do not fit into any one neat field.

Furthermore, it points out that science and engineering are often taught from the perspective of a training course, though instead there is an inherent need to teach it instead like a art class, with the teacher providing more spiritual pointers to the students - encouraging them to adapt their style to suit themselves.

Chapter 2

The second chapter focuses largely on a series of reasons for the computing revolution. These dotpoints are largely as expected, focusing on the various benefits machines have over people. However, there were some that were especially interesting;

Introduction of a machine into a process often requires that process to change. The example given is building something like a car would have been done with bolts and screws, however this method of fixture is relatively complex to automate, so instead welding and rivets are used. Indeed I believe this is still applicable when introducing a new technology, even a piece of software, into a process.

“It has rarely proved pracitcal to produce exactly the same product by machines as we produced by hand.”

Chapter 3

This chapter is largely what it says on the tin - a history of computer hadware. However it does ask the existential question about where a line can be drawn between a simple machine and something more complex like a person.

Chapter 4

Almost every paragraph in this chapter is a study unto itself. One of the main themes is that understanding is not inherent in the discovery or the doing of a thing and that often there is a blinding effect on the inventor of a new technique or method - this can be encapulated in the certaintty of hindsight where paths are nice and linear, whereas the lived experience of the discoverer is far different.

There is also a prominent discussion of what Hammond calls psychological design, which si the premise that a design must not be created for the exports, but for the every day person. When looking at computing, creating a language designed for an everyday person means the subject matter experts are able to create programs.

“… but I would think by the year 2020 it would be fairly universal practice for the expert in the field of application to do the actual program preparation …”

The final sentiment of the chapter is that not all people are created equal in talent for programming, and that the best should be paid handsomely and the worst fired. This sounds very anti-worker - however I choose to believe it is correct in the knowledge that everyone should excell somewhere, so indeed underperformance should be punished to push that person into a better occupation.

Finally, on the various programming methodologies;

“Think before you write the program”

#book/non-fiction