[LINK] 10 tech laws that define our world

Craig Sanders cas at taz.net.au
Fri Mar 9 08:28:17 AEDT 2012


On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 06:35:30AM +1100, Stephen Wilson wrote:
> 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.

it's not necessary to have a degree to be a good, or even great,
programmer - but no-one should call themselves a "software engineer"
unless they actually have an accredited engineering degree, even if they
do scrupulously apply appropriate engineering principles to all their
work.

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

it's worse than meaningless. it's deceptive and misleading. and yet
another aspect of the mediocratisation of culture - the belligerently
anti-intellectual, anti-merit "my opinion's as good as anyone else's"
stance of the ignorant and uninformed.

as a programmer and systems administrator and general-purpose geek
(with about 30 years professional experience) i've been appalled by
the misappropriation of titles like Engineer and Architect since the
90s.  It used to be illegal to call yourself either one of those unless
you were actually qualified to do so AND were a member of the relevant
professional organisations.

i'm amazed that the software industry has gotten away with such wanky,
grandiose, and undeserved job titles.

Those titles mean a hell of a lot more than just "i do a job where some
aspects are quite similar or roughly analagous to what real engineers or
architects do".

...or maybe I should just give in and start calling myself a software
doctor or network surgeon since, as a sysadmin, i look after the health
of computer systems. nonsense.

> 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.

and if/when that happens there will still be a difference between a
programmer and a software engineer.

and there'll still be a need for both. some programming tasks, like
medical device programming as you mentioned and control software for
industrial system and the software that does much of the job of actually
driving modern cars(*) etc, require a strict engineering approach. most
don't.



(*) IMO the roads will be a much safer place when 100% automated cars
are the norm rather than just an experiment. people just aren't good
enough to be trusted with operating such deadly machines in public.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>

BOFH excuse #371:

Incorrectly configured static routes on the corerouters.



More information about the Link mailing list