As to AI, the current crop of AI (which is bubbling very well, and I believe is running itself quickly towards yet another AI winter [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ai_winter]), it may be useful for replacing some percentage of "head count" programmers, it is not likely to be replacing the actual creative, good, programmers (i.e., the one's often referred to as 10x). So the best advice I can give is to strive to really learn your craft such that you can function more towards the 10x side of the spectrum than the "head count" side. That will give you the best assurance of success at present.
PaulHoule•1h ago
https://mastodon.social/@UP8/115500560220694978
and they merged the Computer Science, Information Science and Data Science programs into one big department that enrolls 2000+ students
https://milestones.cis.cornell.edu/
So it is definitely something a lot of people are going into and a person who doesn't want to face a bubble pop might consider something else. One good thing at Cornell is that we have a data science minor that anybody can take. I went to a talk by an English professor for instance who applies quantitative methods and data visualization to literary criticism.
sunscream89•1h ago
I think I have undone and superseded modern information theory and I want them to burn all of their false books.
I’m sure you will neg “how can everybody be wrong!”
And I say, the engineers (firsts of reality) have been driving the progress ideologues process into main stream conjecture. Bertrand Russell and Einstein (in his bio) agreed. Even the story of Shannon getting the word was a quirp about what those engineers were calling it.
So back to theory, if elegance and useful is the prevailing measure of fitness. I propose something to show how humble the true search for understanding.