>>11227851>Computer engineers are computer scientistsyou have a fundamental misunderstanding of what computer science is if you think CE does any of it. No, your basic data structures, and compiler classes do not a computer scientist make.
>analog computing Analog is tedious, not annoying. Computer scientists have long since studied weak cost models for like 30+ years in analog in to get strictly stronger machines than conventional Turing machines. It’s the weak BSS machine.
>incapable of doing X,Y, Z standard techniques covered in art of electronics and an online Stanford lecture Anon, your basic tables, calculus shortcuts, and junior / senior classes in engineering school of all things do not impress me. What’s actually embarrassing is that you felt to hide how basic it was under jargon
>complex combinations that provide amplification None of this is hard, it comes down to literal fractions and diagram hunting. Yes, symmetry circuits are annoying to evaluate and take some techniques, but none of them are hard with a pencil and a piece of paper to mark up a diagram lmao.
>incapable of building on top of current engineeringNot exactly true. Look at anyone from the Stanford graphics group, anyone working in systems (hell even the theory guys who implemented a betterFS filesystem based on the b^epsilon tree), CS architecture researchers in parallelization and cache design, learning on signals research, all of biocomputing and brain inspired computing, etc etc. Most systems researchers work with or on teams with engineering backgrounds. What’s funny is that EE research these days is getting more widespread because of the ubiquity of electrical systems yet less fundamental due to its own theory being matured past actually developing further. Power is literally a solved field, and the big problems these days are in communications.
EE students are massive brainlets who refuse to accept that they know way less from the fields their work draws from
