
Ask HN: back to math? - cageface
It seems like a lot of the most interesting jobs in software these days require a pretty heavy math background. Things like analytics and machine learning and computer graphics in particular. It's occurred to me that it might be worthwhile to go back to school and get a graduate degree in math, which is something that appeals to me intrinsically because I've always enjoyed math anyway.<p>Has anyone else done this? If so, did you find it helpful in getting more interesting work or did you just find yourself overqualified for the typical software job?
======
maxawaytoolong
Analytics is actually very cave-man level math and statistics. You could just
work through Strang for linear algebra and a stats book and you'll know more
than 80% of the people employed doing this work...and that's probably not even
necessary. I will warn you that if you're already an infrastructure
programmer, most of what analytics teams really need is someone to babysit the
data. If you don't want to deal with that, I would disclaim all knowledge of
computer programming beyond Microsoft Excel.

There's loads of blogs where people discuss statistics/ML and echo Hal
Varian's quote that it's the next "sexy career" but if you look at the authors
of those blogs they are all still in grad school, so take that advice with a
grain of salt. Actuaries have been employed doing stats for centuries and they
have never been "sexy," but they get paid ok.

Personally, I find statistics heinously boring so the excitement is lost on
me. Instead of thinking "wow, we're awash in data, finally a reason to use my
Stats 101" I tend to think: "oh fuck now that there's all this data I better
not let anyone know I was an applied math major...I'll get stuck doing Stats
101 all over again." Now if someone wanted to pay me $200K a year to do knot
theory, I'd be stoked...

Graphics is math heavy but you learn that math in a computer science grad
degree, not a math grad degree.

Aside from Wall Street (where the useful math is often from the EE department,
anyway) most math heavy programming jobs (i.e. "scientific computation")
probably pay worse than what you're making now.

Signed, your friendly neighborhood math teacher turned programmer.

------
Q6T46nT668w6i3m
It should be noted that an M.A. in statistics will require aptitude in both
the calculus and algebra. Moreover, a generalized applied degree will require
preliminary knowledge of ordinary differential equations and real analysis.
I’ve also heard from professors that some competency in scientific computation
(i.e. familiarity with both a well-used computer algebra system and
statistical package) is usually expected.

I haven’t pursued either, but I suspect that I will--I’m still an
undergraduate studying general mathematics. But my assumption is that a
generalized applied program is more useful than statistics. I’ve found breadth
to be more important than depth in curriculum. That is, if you have a rigorous
foundation in probability and mathematical statistics, then you could
conceivably learn sampling theory, Bayesian statistics, or linear models
outside of the classroom. Likewise, a rigorous foundation in differential
equations might enable you to pursue chaotic or dynamical systems
independently.

I can’t speak to computer graphics specifically, but some of my peers work in
quantitative finance, and they’ve echoed my sentiments on breadth. I’ve also
heard from professors that one unexpected occurrence about students who enter
either program is that many enter with a specific research interest, say
quantitative finance, but realize they prefer to work in a different field,
say biological statistics. I find the mobility and flexibility attractive.

~~~
cageface
Thanks for the insights. I really enjoy studying math for its own sake so I'm
naturally more inclined to study broadly and build a solid, common foundation
than I am to zero-in on one speciality. My experience in FP, for example, has
kindled an interest in studying algebra in greater depth.

------
craftsman
Yes! I'm in the final stages of finishing my M.S. in Math. I've been doing it
part time and it's been difficult and time-consuming, but very enjoyable.

Interestingly, studying math may have a non-obvious benefit of helping you
understand functional languages like Scheme, Lisp, Clojure, etc. And I believe
that functional languages are going to be quite useful in the years ahead. So
even though you may not get a job in applied math, it may be helpful in all
other kinds of software development.

~~~
cageface
It was actually my experience learning various FP languages that inspired this
idea in the first place.

------
mian2zi3
I'm just starting my 4th year back studying math formally, 2nd year of PhD. I
couldn't be having a better time. Who knows what the other end will look like,
but I doubt I will ever work the "typical software job" again.

~~~
cageface
My hero! Did you have to start from the beginning with an undergraduate degree
or were you able to pick up in the middle somewhere?

~~~
mian2zi3
Mathematically, the beginning, more or less. I had the advantage of having
dropped out of my undergrad, so I went back (after 13 years), changed my major
to math (from CS), finished in two years and applied to graduate school.

If I hadn't been able to resume my undergrad, I'm not sure what I would have
done. Masters? Part-time classes until I'd bulked up my background and
impressed a few professors to write me recommendations? I don't think I would
have done very well applying straight to PhD programs.

------
carbocation
Analytics seems more stats oriented. Actually, I'd say the same about machine
learning, too. Not that math and stats are fundamentally distinct, but there
are different graduate programs offered for the two.

~~~
cageface
That's a good point. I've also considered a stats focus. My limited experience
with ML suggests that linear algebra is pretty important too but certainly
statistics is fundamental to both.

~~~
_delirium
For ML, I think it depends heavily on what you want to do. If you want to
develop new algorithms, prove theorems about them, etc., there is a heavy math
focus, although in terms of departments, you'd probably be more likely to do
it in a CS department with a strong ML group, than in either a math or stats
department. If you want to _use_ ML though, the skills are quite different. A
good handle on statistics is still necessary, so you know when to use which
techniques, and how to interpret the results, but a lot of the math used in ML
as a research area is used mainly to develop the algorithms and prove theorems
about them, and isn't as relevant if you're looking at them mainly as
predictive modeling or data-mining tools to apply to various domains.

------
umenline
did someone tried to learn math ( linear algebra ) from the net ?

~~~
georgecmu
Try this (lectures from the man himself):

<http://academicearth.org/courses/linear-algebra>

~~~
cageface
I've been working through these myself. Great lectures. The whole MIT OCW
thing is a godsend if you're trying to learn any of this stuff outside of a
classroom.

