[LINK] 10 tech laws that define our world

[Stephen Wilson]

On 8/03/2012 9:23 PM, Richard Chirgwin wrote:
> Ben - among engineering authorities (eg, Engineers Australia), I believe
> the status of 'software engineer' remains contentious. Someone can
> correct me if I'm wrong there...
>
> As for project sign-off: no, people can just "finish" their software and
> say goodbye, without a sign-off from someone with engineering accreditation.
>
> I certainly know about civil engineers and bridges.

The state of software engineering as a profession certainly is 
contentious. Was it not on Link a few months ago that people were 
arguing about whether a university degree is necessary to be a good 
programmer? Amazing debate. We wouldn't argue if Richard's civil 
engineer brother needed a degree before be built the bridges we drive on.

I called myself a software engineer for 10 years or so. I worked on real 
time control software for implantable defibrillators. Ultra high 
reliability code, and now when I read with disbelief about malware 
getting into implantable defibs (because they run on Windows or 
somesuch) I realie we wrote high security code at the same time. But 
that's a story for another day ...

Having prided myself as a software engineer, nevertheless I've since 
reached the conclusion that the term is meaningless.

Code is so very unlike the stuff of other professions – soil and gravel, 
metals and alloys, nuts and bolts, electronics, even human flesh and 
blood - that the metaphor of engineering in the phrase "software 
engineering" may be dangerously misplaced. By coopting the term we have 
might have started out on the wrong foot in trying to professionalise 
the programming craft. It won't be until software engineering develops 
the normative tools and standards, culture and patience of a true 
profession that the software crisis will turn around.

Detailed column on the matter here: 
http://lockstep.com.au/blog/2011/02/23/programming-is-like-playwriti.html.

Cheers,

Steve Wilson
Lockstep.