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

No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

shmck.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#191

Post by nly »

sophacles wrote: post #84
tmpz22 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> True. We’re scientists. Replication is important! :) Yes replication: Oops we got hacked. I wonder what happens if we write insecure code again. Oops we got hacked. I wonder what happens if we write insecure code again. Oops we missed a deadline. I wonder what happens if we underestimate again. Oops we missed a deadline. I wonder what happens if we underestimate again.

When did software estimates ever factor into deadlines? I have always found that my estimates + a bit of padding are generally correct. Then management just picks an arbitrary due date that has nothing to do with programmer estimates.

Plus nobody estimates on timescales anymore. We all use sprint points.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#193

Post by wruza »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #98
wruza wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not hire hardware engineers to write software then?

Because software development isnt an engineering task. Engineers are good at building bridges, and artists are good at making paintings. That doesnt mean it is a good idea to have the engineers paint paintings.

That’s the point. It’s not software developer’s fault that things are the way they are. Anyone with strict engineering discipline or whatever is welcome to create software the right way.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#194

Post by sethammons »

yafbum wrote: post #19

A physicist friend used to quote Rutherford, all science is either physics or stamp collecting. By which my friend meant, physics has a way of being checked by physical reality in a way that math or computer science don't. His area of work was extreme magnetic fields. Experimenting meant building giant copper coils, running enough current in them to melt them in place, and then very quickly detonating explosive aroun…

Related to the correct interpretation of that quote:

https://xkcd.com/435/

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#195

Post by paulryanrogers »

RGamma wrote: post #157
organian wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "software engineers aren't really engineers" is putting "real engineering" on a pedestal that is borne of ignorance. Hillel Wayne's engineer interviews were eye-opening on this: https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/are-we-really-engineers/

Programmers calling themselves software engineers suddenly is a very recent phenomenon (barely a decade). Dunno who pushed that, but it's mostly basically (cognitively difficult) Lego at this point. That said, it's also on the order of a hundred years younger a discipline and our theory is not so well developed.

Engineers used to mean seige-machine builders. Language will evolve.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#196

Post by mb7733 »

halostatue wrote: post #174
RGamma wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programmers calling themselves software engineers suddenly is a very recent phenomenon (barely a decade). Dunno who pushed that, but it's mostly basically (cognitively difficult) Lego at this point. That said, it's also on the order of a hundred years younger a discipline and our theory is not so well developed.

Try longer than my career (approaching 30 years in the business), often pushed by the business and kicked into high gear with the rapid need for development resources with the combination of Y2K mitigation and the first dot-com boom. Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engi…

> Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engineering. I understand engineering organizations (like those in Canada) who oppose the use of the term "software engineer" because there's no common code of practice or standards in the same way that those who wear the iron ring claim is incorrect

Just to clarify, there's no issue in Canada with "software engineer" specifically. "Engineer" is the protected term, and you have to be licensed to use it. So the issue applies to calling yourself any kind of engineer without being licensed.

If you are a licensed professional engineer in the software field, you can refer to yourself as a software engineer. This is just uncommon because there are not a lot of programs that grant BEng in software, the licensing is rarely relevant, and most people take CS anyway.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#197

Post by WelcomeShorty »

mb7733 wrote: post #196
halostatue wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try longer than my career (approaching 30 years in the business), often pushed by the business and kicked into high gear with the rapid need for development resources with the combination of Y2K mitigation and the first dot-com boom. Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engi…

> Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engineering. I understand engineering organizations (like those in Canada) who oppose the use of the term "software engineer" because there's no common code of practice or standards in the same way that those who wear the iron ring clai…

> "Engineer" is the protected term, and you have to be licensed to use it.

The IEEE documented that a little different:

It is the IEEE-USA position that:

• Individuals who have graduated with an engineering degree from an ABET/EAC accredited program of engineering education should not be prohibited from using the title “Engineer.”

• The protected titles “Professional Engineer,” “Licensed Engineer,” “Registered Engineer,” and variations thereof, should be reserved for those whose education and experience qualify them to practice in a manner that protects public health, safety and welfare -- and who have been licensed to practice engineering by a jurisdiction.

From: https://ieeeusa.org/assets/public-policy/positions/workforce...

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#198

Post by halostatue »

WelcomeShorty wrote: post #197
mb7733 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engineering. I understand engineering organizations (like those in Canada) who oppose the use of the term "software engineer" because there's no common code of practice or standards in the same way that those who wear the iron ring clai…

> "Engineer" is the protected term, and you have to be licensed to use it. The IEEE documented that a little different: It is the IEEE-USA position that: • Individuals who have graduated with an engineering degree from an ABET/EAC accredited program of engineering education should not be prohibited from using the title “Engineer.” • The protected titles “Professional Engineer,” “Licensed Engineer,” “Registered Engine…

That seems to me to be a much more sensible position than that of the provincial licensing bodies here in Canada, who attempt to regulate all uses of the term "engineer", even though many uses are orthogonal to the regulated profession.

The objection is IMO as linguistically specious as the one aimed by MDs against PhDs. Both are entitled to the honorific Doctor, and context is as important as anything else.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#199

Post by tialaramex »

maeil wrote: post #162
tialaramex wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it went fine. I had Hodgkins, like 20+ years ago, it's very curable and (I didn't know at the time) occurs relatively often in young men. They fixed it. It's fun because I'm a walking example of why universal healthcare makes sense - even economic sense. I was a broke student, if healthcare cost money there's no way I'd have even gone to a doctor to ask about my weird symptoms - they weren't even really annoyin…

What symptoms did you have?

Mostly swollen lymph nodes, which is also associated with: Any infection (even one you didn't notice along with common colds). But I noticed they had stayed like that for a while, which I thought was odd. It is odd, turns out it can mean you have Cancer. Of your lymphatic system.

Re: No dogs were harmed in the making of this app

#200

Post by mb7733 »

WelcomeShorty wrote: post #197
mb7733 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, there are a lot of "developers". But there are also software engineers, even if our engineering craft is less-well developed by the standards of civil engineering or mechanical engineering. I understand engineering organizations (like those in Canada) who oppose the use of the term "software engineer" because there's no common code of practice or standards in the same way that those who wear the iron ring clai…

> "Engineer" is the protected term, and you have to be licensed to use it. The IEEE documented that a little different: It is the IEEE-USA position that: • Individuals who have graduated with an engineering degree from an ABET/EAC accredited program of engineering education should not be prohibited from using the title “Engineer.” • The protected titles “Professional Engineer,” “Licensed Engineer,” “Registered Engine…

I was explaining the view of the governing bodies in Canada.
Post reply on HN