Yeah cryptography mostly (but certainly not all) math but it accounts for a negligible (pun intended) portion of interesting security work.
AI is a lot of math, especially if you hang out with the quasiconvex optimization crowd, but a vast majority of work in that field can not properly constitute “theory”
I think it’s clear in practice that computer science has officially strayed beyond whatever narrow bounds people originally wished to confine it to.
Alot of its a push for practicality/catering to student's interests. IMO its a result of a really archaic education system. Universities were originally small and meant for theoretical study, not as a de facto path for everyone to enroll into in order to get a job.
If it were me Id get rid of statically defined 4 year programs, and/or definite required courses for degrees, or just degrees in general. Just offer courses and let people come learn what they want.
One of my favorite classes was a python class that focused on building some simple games with tkinter, making a chat client, hosting a server, because it was the first time I understood how actual software worked. Im really glad I took that class.
On the other hand Id love to have learned information theory, lamba calculus, all the early AI, cognitive science, theory of programming languages, philosophy behind all of it that got us here
Your point is well taken and to some extent I agree, but I think you have to recognize. It’s not just student interest, career preparation, and practicality.
The research done by professional academic computer scientists also reflects the broad scope I’m advocating for.
AI is a lot of math, especially if you hang out with the quasiconvex optimization crowd, but a vast majority of work in that field can not properly constitute “theory”
I think it’s clear in practice that computer science has officially strayed beyond whatever narrow bounds people originally wished to confine it to.