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

The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

codemanship.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#91

Post by vonmoltke »

rayiner wrote: post #57
pessimizer wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What exactly do you understand under freebies [for 100y+ prof org members]? Doctors, Lawyers, Realtors, etc. have written 90% of the state laws that they are governed under, and most of the federal ones. They've protected themselves against foreign competition, and shielded themselves against liability.

Without necessarily disagreeing with your point, it's interesting to note that software developers bear almost zero liability in practice for all the buggy software they write, while even big name law firms get sued, and lose, regularly on malpractice claims. If Microsoft was as "protected" from malpractice as lawyers are, they would've been sued out of existence for Windows 95/98/ME.

The core problem here is the legal system allowing software companies to successfully disclaim all liability for their software products. Traditional manufacturers can and do get sued over defects in their products.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#92

Post by maratd »

gamblor956 wrote: post #85
maratd wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no overarching professional organization or boards, therefore incompetents aren't de-certified and national lobbying isn't coherent. Incompetents are rarely de-certified in professions that have what are effectively guilds. How nutty do you have to be to appreciate a holdover from the middle ages? In fact, it is usually the incompetents who seek the protection of guilds and unions. Without them, where would…

Lawyers, doctors, and engineers are all required to pass tests before they can practice. They prove their competence before they can even begin working in the field. Furthermore, they are required to take continuing education classes for the duration of their professional careers. Finally, and probably most importantly, professional are subject to fiduciary obligations to their clients that require a minimum standard…

> Lawyers, doctors, and engineers are all required to pass tests before they can practice. They prove their competence before they can even begin working in the field.

Because performance on a multiple-choice exam equates to competence in the field? Nice one.

> Finally, and probably most importantly, professional are subject to fiduciary obligations to their clients that require a minimum standard of professional conduct--if they mess up, they can (and do) get sued for malpractice.

I have an equal obligation to my clients and can just as easily get sued if I engineer crap.

> OTOH, apparently programmers can call themselves programmers after a 6 week course

I can call myself a surgeon after dissecting a frog, it doesn't make me into one. People call themselves things all the time. So what?

> Programmers aren't responsible for their mistakes--if they mess up, the client's option is to pay for someone to fix it with no option for recompense.

Err... what? My clients pay me by credit card. If the thingie I made doesn't do what it's supposed to, they can and will get a refund from the credit card company.

Try getting a refund from a doctor or a hospital for poor service. I dare you.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#93

Post by rayiner »

pessimizer wrote: post #84
rayiner wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google, SAP, etc, get sued for things like breach of contract, patent infringement, etc. A lawyer or doctor can get sued for his or her work not meeting the expected standard. Imagine the following bug: a variable can take on values of RED, GREEN, and BLUE. You write a switch statement that fails to consider BLUE. Your product crashes, causing your user $5 million in business losses. You get sued for software malprac…

Perfect case for how professionalism protects clients. We'd all have to carry insurance for that.

Well I wasn't really suggesting it as a good thing necessarily. I like the spirit that ethical/competency self-regulation instills in the legal profession, but I'm not sure whether the ultimate market impact is a good thing or not. On one hand, I think the financial industry has suffered from a lack of such regulation (e.g. Goldman advising clients to buy certain products while taking an adverse position themselves). On the other hand, the potential liability and need for insurance creates barriers to entry, driving up prices. Given the staggering potential losses from software, professional malpractice insurance probably wouldn't be cheap. But on the third, alien, hand, I think licensure also has a downward effect on the cost of legal services, by making lawyers more fungible than they would otherwise be (in the absence of licensure, the market might come to rely on an even rarer signal of credibility).

The economic dynamics of licensed professions are a bit more complex than either side of the "developers should be professionals" debate really appreciates.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#94

Post by thatthatis »

pnathan wrote: post #72
thatthatis wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the addition. I made un-researched generalizations based on limited knowledge of the skills possessed by the pioneers in the field. I agree that it has, at the least, nuanced errors. But, I try not to let the exact truth get in the way of a good story unless the exact truth is the crux of the argument.

I'm sorry, but the truth desperately matters in your account. Timelines are very important in understanding how knowledge flows from group to group and from generation to generation. In particular, these things need to be highlighted: - Computers became commercialized around 1952-54. Immediately prior to that, physicists hired programmers for the clerk work of coding up their problems (interesting note: they usually…

How do these differences change the crux? We are in the process of the industry splitting into technicians and developers and this is overall a good thing?

I think they are interesting details, for sure, but I don't see exactly why you think they're relevant on a first order approximation.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#95

Post by thatthatis »

angersock wrote: post #37
thatthatis wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the addition. I made un-researched generalizations based on limited knowledge of the skills possessed by the pioneers in the field. I agree that it has, at the least, nuanced errors. But, I try not to let the exact truth get in the way of a good story unless the exact truth is the crux of the argument.

"But, I try not to let the exact truth get in the way of a good story unless the exact truth is the crux of the argument." The computer cares not for your platitudes. Fix your shit. (More specifically, at least put some timelines on your milestones--you overlook, for example, a lot of computer early adoption by banks and insurance companies. A lot . See Burroughs et al.) (These feel-good stories only serve to further…

I think I gave an account of history that is accurate enough on a first order approximation, and it is history as parable to come sideways until I got to the key point of: specialization is a good thing.

Are any of the field divisions I mentioned inaccurate? Or is it the chronology youre objecting to?

This isn't a feel good story, it is a parable. My entire point could be rephrased in a more hostile fashion as: It is not presently feasible to be an expert in every aspect of computing, so why is further division of the field a bad thing?

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#96

Post by thatthatis »

vinceguidry wrote: post #65
thatthatis wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the addition. I made un-researched generalizations based on limited knowledge of the skills possessed by the pioneers in the field. I agree that it has, at the least, nuanced errors. But, I try not to let the exact truth get in the way of a good story unless the exact truth is the crux of the argument.

It really isn't that hard to do basic research to test your assumptions. If you don't do it for us, at least do it for yourself. A good story is all of accurate, insightful and entertaining. Yours is mainly the latter, lack of accuracy relegates the insight you were hoping to convey to bullshit.

It is not hard. But it is also not justified by a cost benefit analysis of the situation (this is after all a comment thread on hn). I gave a historical parable about not getting high and mighty when the industry advances its abstractions to the point where less years of study are needed to efficiently build things.

If you feel my level of detail takes away from my goal of providing a relatable parable, please let me know how.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#97

Post by thatthatis »

stackcollision wrote: post #16
thatthatis wrote: post #4

To write software, you used to have to be a physiscist. Or a least a mathematician with a deep understanding of why the registers were working. Then, the physics was more or less mastered and the profession split into electrical engineering (the physicists lamented this degradation I'm sure) and applied mathematics. Then, the math was more or less mastered to a level it could safely be abstracted away and math spun o…

Adding 'technicians' is not a bad thing, because like you said it lets us focus on the real problems. The 14 year olds can configure their blogs and fix peoples' computers while we write the software to send spaceships to Mars. But let's face it: the more extroverted among us are jealous of the "social media gurus" who are waving their hands on the television stations and spewing garbage opinions. They didn't work fo…

I remember seeing a documentary on ford where craftsmen who built non-interchangeable-parts cars bemoaned the loss of craftsmanship in the assembly line method. Bitching and moaning about progress finds a way, even with the most rudimentary of tech.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#98

Post by angersock »

thatthatis wrote: post #95
angersock wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But, I try not to let the exact truth get in the way of a good story unless the exact truth is the crux of the argument." The computer cares not for your platitudes. Fix your shit. (More specifically, at least put some timelines on your milestones--you overlook, for example, a lot of computer early adoption by banks and insurance companies. A lot . See Burroughs et al.) (These feel-good stories only serve to further…

I think I gave an account of history that is accurate enough on a first order approximation, and it is history as parable to come sideways until I got to the key point of: specialization is a good thing. Are any of the field divisions I mentioned inaccurate? Or is it the chronology youre objecting to? This isn't a feel good story, it is a parable. My entire point could be rephrased in a more hostile fashion as: It is…

You could've made that point and probably gotten a decent enough discussion out of it, no harm done.

The problem with the parable is that it didn't read like a parable, and instead read like a layman's explanation of history--were it more clear or disclaimed, I doubt any of us would've taken offense.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#99

Post by thatthatis »

angersock wrote: post #98
thatthatis wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I gave an account of history that is accurate enough on a first order approximation, and it is history as parable to come sideways until I got to the key point of: specialization is a good thing. Are any of the field divisions I mentioned inaccurate? Or is it the chronology youre objecting to? This isn't a feel good story, it is a parable. My entire point could be rephrased in a more hostile fashion as: It is…

You could've made that point and probably gotten a decent enough discussion out of it, no harm done. The problem with the parable is that it didn't read like a parable, and instead read like a layman's explanation of history--were it more clear or disclaimed, I doubt any of us would've taken offense.

Were but there an edit button, I could go back and make that clear

No harm done. Have a good one.

Re: The Erosion Of The Status Of Software Developers As Professionals

#100

Post by angersock »

thatthatis wrote: post #99
angersock wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could've made that point and probably gotten a decent enough discussion out of it, no harm done. The problem with the parable is that it didn't read like a parable, and instead read like a layman's explanation of history--were it more clear or disclaimed, I doubt any of us would've taken offense.

Were but there an edit button, I could go back and make that clear No harm done. Have a good one.

You too!
Post reply on HN