Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 149 posts

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#131

Post by threatofrain »

There are so many kinds of engineers, and I have little doubt that the author cherry-picked picked the situations that helped their worldview of engineers, while suppressing examples they don't like.

Like there are biomedical engineer, a hardware engineer, a petroleum engineer, the agricultural engineer, etc. These people don't obviously have a united ethic of placing public benefit first. The petroleum engineer is under no obligation to think of the public good. If anything, they are obligated to think of the employer's good.

To me, an engineer is a classification that separates you from a scientist. An engineer is mostly interested in applying knowledge, whereas a scientist is principally interested in producing new knowledge. The line is blurred when scientists are interested in applications, and engineers produce new ideas during practical circumstances.

In that way, a doctor is an engineer, but I'm not going to insist that doctors professionally rebrand themselves to fit my pet perspective.

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#132

Post by whatwasmypwd »

bshimmin wrote: post #8

While I don't much like software developers calling themselves engineers either, it was hard not to read this and think that about a week ago I was reading all about a dam that seemed poised to fail and thousands of people had to be evacuated; or about a miracle of engineering, a skyscraper in SF that appears to be sinking ( https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/23/us/san-francisco-millenni... or, oh, here's an entire Wiki…

A very real and sad example of problems with software.

http://www-users.math.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/patriot.html

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#133

Post by eru »

booleandilemma wrote: post #125
eru wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are relying on LinkedIn to get opportunities, you are going to miss out on a lot of them. (LinkedIn is a joke. And nobody gives a damn about what people call themselves.)

I know there is a lot of hate for LinkedIn here, and I agree 90% of LinkedIn is crap, but I did get my last job through LinkedIn, so I have to admit it's not all bad.

Yes. It just feels like a bad dating website most times.

Btw, I had a much better class of recruiter propositioning me on stackoverflow's careers website: http://stackoverflow.com/jobs Can recommend. (And I don't even have any real karma on stackoverflow.)

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#134

Post by eru »

Alex3917 wrote: post #122
eru wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to take a bet on that? We just need to nail down some details: what jurisdiction(s) are we talking about? And what do you mean by licenced?: eg people without the licence won't be allowed to program computers? What odds are you offering? I am pretty confident, so I am happy to give you ten to one odds. Ie you pay me 1 dollar if no regulation&unionization happens, I pay you 10 if it does.

Not interested in betting. > What jurisdiction(s) are we talking about? But to clarify, I'm talking about the U.S. > And what do you mean by licenced?: eg people without the licence won't be allowed to program computers? I think at least one of the big tech firms will be unionized within the next five years, with more following soon after. I think initially people already employed will be grandfathered in without any…

It's not about the money, it's about going on public record (and also about nailing down the odds you are willing to give).

Interesting perspective you have. May I ask what makes you think so? Any current indications? What could go otherwise, and why? Do you see the beginning of these trends already?

I would be very surprised if any of the big American big tech companies (say, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon or any other company that rises to similar status in the next five years) will get unionised like you say.

There are already certificates available for employers to judge: be that university issued degrees or industry certificates like from Cisco or Microsoft. From all I can tell, the top employers don't care about them (and if anything, I have seen people scanning resumes react negatively to CVs claiming industry certifications). So current trends don't seem to point in your direction---as far as I can tell.

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#135

Post by yellowapple »

I call myself an "engineer" in situations where there's really no better fit. Neither "programmer" nor "sysadmin" fully capture the scope of my typical roles, and I do tend to take an engineer-like mindset when building things (shooting for "move slow and prevent breakage" over "move fast and break things").

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#136

Post by Alex3917 »

eru wrote: post #134
Alex3917 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not interested in betting. > What jurisdiction(s) are we talking about? But to clarify, I'm talking about the U.S. > And what do you mean by licenced?: eg people without the licence won't be allowed to program computers? I think at least one of the big tech firms will be unionized within the next five years, with more following soon after. I think initially people already employed will be grandfathered in without any…

It's not about the money, it's about going on public record (and also about nailing down the odds you are willing to give). Interesting perspective you have. May I ask what makes you think so? Any current indications? What could go otherwise, and why? Do you see the beginning of these trends already? I would be very surprised if any of the big American big tech companies (say, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon or a…

> May I ask what makes you think so? Any current indications? What could go otherwise, and why? Do you see the beginning of these trends already?

Basically there are already people quietly working on this, and when those efforts surface it's going to become apparent that it's in everyone's best interests to go along.

Unlike other industries, unionization in tech isn't going to be about negotiating salaries. Those are already good enough, and there is zero incentive for workers to organize around standardized wages.

Instead, tech workers are going to negotiate for things like longer periods to exercise their options after changing employers, and ownership over their side projects. And in exchange, my prediction is that management is going to negotiate for labor to become more self-policing to lower their costs of hiring and risk exposure.

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#137

Post by taylodl »

There are some regulations for software. I work for a U.S.-based electric power utility that owns and operates a nuclear power generating station. There are most definitely regulations addressing the software used in the operation of that facility.

But that's an extreme case. More generally, I see programming as a skilled trade and not an engineering practice. In my worldview programming is akin to carpentry, plumbing, electrical work, etc. Yes, one needs an aptitude for the job and some technical training - maybe even an apprenticeship - but by and large we should see programming as a skilled trade. Viewed in that context Peter Thiel's comments about education make sense - we don't insist plumbers and carpenters get 4 year degrees to practice their trade, so why do we insist that for programmers?

For software projects whose failure would cause tremendous harm to the public, either physically or financially, then I could see having a certified software engineer oversee the construction of that system. I don't see this as any different than how we build buildings. Certified engineers/architects design the building, review the design and inspect each stage of the build process and final result while tradesmen build the building. This model prevents us from overcorrecting and insisting all programmers become certified engineers - that's not necessary.

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#138

Post by hamami »

Spooky23 wrote: post #77
bshimmin wrote: post #8

While I don't much like software developers calling themselves engineers either, it was hard not to read this and think that about a week ago I was reading all about a dam that seemed poised to fail and thousands of people had to be evacuated; or about a miracle of engineering, a skyscraper in SF that appears to be sinking ( https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/23/us/san-francisco-millenni... or, oh, here's an entire Wiki…

Pointing out failures in engineering isn't a productive exercise. The difference is that engineers have both professional ethical obligations that they can fall back on and accountability. It is possible that the guy who stamped the sinking skyscraper will lose his license, for example. In technology, the lack of a real engineering culture is a profoundly negative thing in many ways. When your boss demands that you d…

This is simply not true for all tech companies. I've had instances where I said no due to asks being not in line with company policies and we changed course to tackle the problem another way. I work at Microsoft and there's severe rules against retaliation should your boss penalize you for something like this.

Re: Programmers should not call themselves engineers (2015)

#139

Post by Spooky23 »

hamami wrote: post #138
Spooky23 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing out failures in engineering isn't a productive exercise. The difference is that engineers have both professional ethical obligations that they can fall back on and accountability. It is possible that the guy who stamped the sinking skyscraper will lose his license, for example. In technology, the lack of a real engineering culture is a profoundly negative thing in many ways. When your boss demands that you d…

This is simply not true for all tech companies. I've had instances where I said no due to asks being not in line with company policies and we changed course to tackle the problem another way. I work at Microsoft and there's severe rules against retaliation should your boss penalize you for something like this.

For every Microsoft, you have 50 pretty much any advertising network, random consulting firm or other company that doesn't give a shit.
Post reply on HN