How long will there be computer science departments?

How long will there be English departments? Every professional needs to be able to communicate ideas in writing. One would assume that in time English would be absorbed into other departments that applied it.

From the comments on the linked article's site:<p><i>&#62;I currently work in a bioinformatics group, and have been in computer applications for science for 20 years. I do not think Bioinformatics will be going back to biology, I see it as going back to computer science and biology. As the tools get better, there will be less and less need for people that understand both – there will still biology computer applications, but it will be commercialized and individual labs will not have their own developers. You can already see the trend starting. Statisticians do not write their own stats programs, they buy SAS or download R, in 10 years biologists will be doing the same.</i><p>I tend to agree with this.<p>More than computer science departments going away, I see other departments following the lead of Schools of Business Administration. Essentially every SBA now offers a degree that is essentially a 'Management Information Systems' degree, which instructs on how to take the specialized applications that exist out there and leverage them in your firm to accomplish any number of organizational goals.<p>I could see a trend where more and more departments develop their analog to this, suited to their specific discipline.

I think that, though computer science has permeated a number of different fields, its core study remains more relevant than ever. There are important theoretical problems in CS and so much more potential to be unlocked in other fields s.t. the core study remains necessary to understand how it can be better applied.<p>Also, there are areas in computer science that wouldn't be 100% applicable to, say, bioinformatics (e.g. cryptography) but may be very applicable in a much more generalized sense. I don't think we've delved into computer science for long enough that its study can be relegated and subjugated within other fields. That it is taught alongside courses in other fields speaks more to its practicality than its diminishing relevance as a standalone field.

I don’t see the problem here as long as we really are talking about computer science. The University of Cambridge has two departments within the mathematics faculty already, one studying pure maths and statistics, the other applied maths and theoretical physics. Separating computer science research and teaching into a third element doesn’t seem inconsistent with that approach to me (though that’s not how the Computer Laboratory in Cambridge actually became what it is today).<p>Now, if we’re talking about teaching people to program simple software tools, as a useful practical skill like modelling something using calculus or writing a clear report, that’s a different question. There is room in the world both for specialists who are experts in a field and study the hard problems and for practitioners who aren’t experts but know enough to get useful things done. A full computer science course in a dedicated department is not a good fit for the latter group, who really need solid basic programming skills and perhaps a little software engineering knowledge.

With respect, I think the author confuses the roles of specialization and generalization. There are general skills within the domain of Computer Science that can be applied to other fields. Just like there are general skills from Statistics that apply across other fields, or general skills from English, or general skills from various disciplines of Mathematics. One can apply these skills across disciplines without needing to specialize, per se, in the discipline from which the skill derives.<p>Alternatively, one can decide that the skill's parent discipline is worth specializing in. If I'm a Biology major, and I discover that I am getting a kick out of the Statistics skills I employ in my major, even more so than I enjoy my major, I can decide to major in Statistics instead. This does not obviate the need for the two fields as separate fields of study. Nor does it present any real indication that one field is going to be collapsed into the other. The sets of Biology and Statistics have many intersections, but they are not the same set.<p>And that's the key: the fields are intersecting, and occasionally even overlapping, but they're not entirely so.<p>At the risk of sounding even nerdier, maybe this concept comes more naturally to those of us who've played an RPG or two in our day. Think Skyrim, if you've played it. You can build a melee fighter who draws a few skills from the magic skill tree. Or you can be a pure mage. Or a pure fighter. Or what have you. At the same time, there are only so many skill points you're allotted -- so you can't pick all of each tree. It works the same way in life, really. It's probably better to be a master of one trade with a few skills from the others, than to be a jack of all trades and master of none.<p>This has been my daily admission of dorkitude. Thanks for listening.

I might imagine one day C.S. departments might merge back into the Maths department, where (IMHO) C.S. most properly belongs.

Why are math departments still around? My engineering professors insisted on teaching probability and linear algebra.

Gosh what a silly argument, claim that 'computer science' as a discipline will fade away based on the evidence that computer classes are taught in different disciplines.<p>That claim is simple to rebut with the example of mathematics, which are taught in various forms for nearly every department and yet there are still mathematics departments.<p>It would have been insightful to observe that basic computer science knowledge is becoming an essential part of any curriculum. That elevates it to the level of 'broadly applicable skill' like math, and composition. I believe its important as early as secondary school but those courses are still foundering for direction (I've seen 'intro to powerpoint' as a computer class which is more like 'typing' was than basic computer skills)

As long as there are computer science students.

Answer: for a long time to come. As long as there are students looking for credentials and certification in the form of degrees, there will be programs that cater to them.<p>You should see some of the outlandish courses and degrees offered by some schools.

As a bioinformatician, I've been asked all of the following questions by (postdoc and above) biologists:<p>- What is a binomial distribution?<p>- What is the difference between a probability and a p-value?<p>- If I have p-values for a case and control group, can I just subtract the log10 p-value for my control from my case group?<p>From fellow "bioinformaticians", research scientist level and above, I've been asked:<p>- How can I load this MySQL dump you sent me into my database? phpMyAdmin doesn't read MySQL dumps.<p>- What is a likelihood ratio (from a PI!!)<p>So, needless to say, I feel that I have some good job security.

Does this writer assume CS is simply a tool used in other industries? There should be CS departments as long as we want to advance the power and reach of computing.

How long will there be physics departments? Physics is just theoretical engineering and chemistry. Most actual users of physics are engineers or chemists; why would anyone need a separate physics department?

So when will job interviews stop asking about red-black trees?

&#62; How long will there be computer science departments?<p>Um...isn't that a form of the Halting Problem? ;D