Look at any computer science curriculum at any top school, and you’ll see that many years of math beyond calc are required. Most computer science programs are not in the college of engineering, but in arts and sciences. It’s still a rigorous discipline. I guess engineering graduates can’t read, or something.

You would be wrong to call those people “computer programmers.” People with computer science degrees (as distinct from computer engineering) are computer programmers.

According to the jackhole who stared this, hardware engineering is engineering; software engineering however can only mean a first year script kiddie writing PHP.

This person was almost certainly a DevOps guy, which is neither here nor there when it comes to knowledge of engineering from a computer perspective. System engineering is engineering, in that you must design carefully and balance the inevitable trade offs, in this case between designing a system which needs to be…

What a dope. You seen the computer science degree requirements at any decent school in, say, the last 50 years? There exists a whole army of people who studied calc I, II, III, differential equations, linear algebra, real analysis, etc but who don’t give a shit about electrical engineering. You must live under a rock…

Anybody who thinks “writing code” is somehow a monkey or keyboard jockey has never “written code.” Edsger Dijkstra wrote code. Knuth wrote code. Stallman writes code. Torvalds writes code.

Yo, pocket protector, in this century there are plenty, PLENTY of companies doing serious software development in which people with degrees in computer science are called “engineers”. That noun is not locked in mortal embrace with “electrical.”

So Trump shouts lock her up for a year, and you’re complaining that the media is mudslinging? How about “yo, crackers! Unless you’re in the 1% and own a Wall Street bank, Trump is not your friend.”

Lol, vaping. Douchebags are not people...

Because Japan isn’t doing it the way you think it does.

The FDA approval process doesn’t take ten years. Getting a drug to submission takes ten (more like 15) years. Target discovery, validation, drug discovery, validation, preclinical, tox, PK/PD. It’s a bogus argument. The reason so few new drugs get approved each year is that over 80% of all drugs that make it to phase…

I work for a Japanese pharma, and you’re totally wrong about their efficacy requirements.

Just, in some cases, quite demonstrably misguided, incorrect, and uneducated about the problem.

That argument “more people die from FDA regulations” is bullshit. Based on what measure? Because some people died before a drug could get to market? A) drug development takes most of the time, not FDA approval, so they’re wrong there, B) what about all the people AFTER THEM on the timeline, who are now presented with…

A phase III clinical trial takes a year. That’s ONE YEAR, to show efficacy, and understand what your drug is doing.

Thought experiment: I think I’ve developed a better treatment for rabies. I don’t have to show efficacy. Ok, do you want my drug or standard of care? If you guess wrong you’re going to die in agony, and insane. Go ahead.

“A company will pay to track its performance.” That’s not a double-blind trial. You still don’t know whether the drug is working or not. Jesus.

Except it’s not about weight loss. It’s about curing your scarlet fever, or dying from it. Idiotic ideas like this have been around a long time, and there’s a reason why no scientific society has adopted them.

You’re assuming the drug “saves” your life, meaning you’re completely cured, versus dying. The diseases like that are rare indeed. Most people dying to get into trials are cancer patients, and we’re talking about prolonging their lives by months, or improving the quality of that time, not curing them.

He just doesn’t understand how it works.