Is software engineering, well, engineering?

[El Pollo Diablo]

To be fair, "science" is misused as a term too. The science museum in London, for example, is mostly an engineering museum. Not easy, this taxonomic shite.

[plodder]

I think you mean grubby heavy metal t-shirt.

Plaid flannel shirt and jeans in my case. And yes, I'm doing engineering, in that I'm designing a feed horn and making sure it meets spec. and is manufacturable. And also writing some code to coding standards while my simulations are running.

Right, that's engineering. The question is whether (and I appreciate you've got the look spot on) if you were just doing the coding bit whether you'd really be a proper engineer. "coding to standard" is a bit like "writing a report to standard" which is a bit like "doing things properly in a checked shirt".

Basically, I'm not trying to troll you, but I am trying to troll sheldrake, who I'm pretty sure puts adverts into websites.

[dyqik]

I think you mean grubby heavy metal t-shirt.

Plaid flannel shirt and jeans in my case. And yes, I'm doing engineering, in that I'm designing a feed horn and making sure it meets spec. and is manufacturable. And also writing some code to coding standards while my simulations are running.

Right, that's engineering. The question is whether (and I appreciate you've got the look spot on) if you were just doing the coding bit whether you'd really be a proper engineer. "coding to standard" is a bit like "writing a report to standard" which is a bit like "doing things properly in a checked shirt".

Basically, I'm not trying to troll you, but I am trying to troll sheldrake, who I'm pretty sure puts adverts into websites.

Designing a process to put ads into websites is engineering, but just putting them in is factory-floor level code monkeying. Coding generally covers both the engineering and repetitive process following that only looks different from assembly line work because the assembly line is in Jira ticket-flows or similar rather than a big chunk of noisy metal.

[plodder]

That's fair enough in terms of the way the problem is solved, but my branch of engineering (civils) has a historical association (and I don't want to get high and mighty here) with the creation of some sort of public benefit, and I think other branches of engineering would also want to claim similar.

Which is why we sneer a little at air conditioning engineers etc, and perhaps is also why software engineers might be struggling for recognition. Design the code for the space shuttle, fair enough. Design the code for the Inland Revenue website... not so much.

[dyqik]

That's fair enough in terms of the way the problem is solved, but my branch of engineering (civils) has a historical association (and I don't want to get high and mighty here) with the creation of some sort of public benefit, and I think other branches of engineering would also want to claim similar.

Which is why we sneer a little at air conditioning engineers etc, and perhaps is also why software engineers might be struggling for recognition. Design the code for the space shuttle, fair enough. Design the code for the Inland Revenue website... not so much.

The latter one generates far more public benefit from getting it right, and causes far more public harm and expense if you get it wrong...

[plodder]

Ah - that'll be it. <waits patiently for a decent IR website....>

[dyqik]

Ah - that'll be it. <waits patiently for a decent IR website....>

The US IRS one isn't terrible, given the constraints and environment it has to work in.

[plodder]

So I suppose that's another question. Can an engineer call what they do engineering if the solution is a bit crap? Or is that "bodging"?

[dyqik]

So I suppose that's another question. Can an engineer call what they do engineering if the solution is a bit crap? Or is that "bodging"?

That definitely rules out the Space Shuttle as engineering...

[sheldrake]

Plaid flannel shirt and jeans in my case. And yes, I'm doing engineering, in that I'm designing a feed horn and making sure it meets spec. and is manufacturable. And also writing some code to coding standards while my simulations are running.

Right, that's engineering. The question is whether (and I appreciate you've got the look spot on) if you were just doing the coding bit whether you'd really be a proper engineer. "coding to standard" is a bit like "writing a report to standard" which is a bit like "doing things properly in a checked shirt".

Basically, I'm not trying to troll you, but I am trying to troll sheldrake, who I'm pretty sure puts adverts into websites.

Designing a process to put ads into websites is engineering, but just putting them in is factory-floor level code monkeying. Coding generally covers both the engineering and repetitive process following that only looks different from assembly line work because the assembly line is in Jira ticket-flows or similar rather than a big chunk of noisy metal.

ho ho ho. you really don't know what you're talking about.

[sheldrake]

That's fair enough in terms of the way the problem is solved, but my branch of engineering (civils) has a historical association (and I don't want to get high and mighty here) with the creation of some sort of public benefit, and I think other branches of engineering would also want to claim similar.

Which is why we sneer a little at air conditioning engineers etc, and perhaps is also why software engineers might be struggling for recognition. Design the code for the space shuttle, fair enough. Design the code for the Inland Revenue website... not so much.

Software engineers aren't struggling for recognition, they're paid well. All modern electronic communications, commerce, industrial control systems and entertainment uses their skills heavily.

The Inland Revenue website works pretty well for a govt. project tbh.

[plodder]

They're struggling for recognition if their STEM peers aren't sure if what they do is engineering or not.

[sheldrake]

They're struggling for recognition if their STEM peers aren't sure if what they do is engineering or not.

We're not bound by their limited understanding. Software engineering is the most creative engineering discipline by far. Once a problem is solved, the solution can be copied and reused indefinitely. The work is inherently more innovative because of this.

The real question is what do we think of them ?

[plodder]

And that's a really interesting question. Because as a civil engineer I've been waiting for innovation to spill over from silicon valley for a little while now. It's a huge sector that's ripe for disruption and yet... Hyperloop.

[sheldrake]

And that's a really interesting question. Because as a civil engineer I've been waiting for innovation to spill over from silicon valley for a little while now. It's a huge sector that's ripe for disruption and yet... Hyperloop.

The software innovation is in all the electronics you use, from smartphones to engine management systems.

The reason Silicon Valley makes so much money is that it's possible to make much more revenue per engineer than has ever really been possible with 'physical' engineering like civil or nuclear. That's why it's not that common for silicon valley people to dive into that world, at least not for hard-nosed business reasons. For things they think are cool like private space or altruistic biomedical work, sure. But that's not how they bring home their bacon.

[plodder]

Ah, so an engineer is someone who brings in lots of revenue for their employer. So a banker is a financial engineer. Gotcha.

The reason some silicon valley firms make so much money is that they are gruesome oppressive monopolies making the world a worse place, rather than because innovative capitalism is awesome.

[plodder]

In terms of things that are "cool" and "funky" enough to entice silicon valley engineers away from their comfortable hypercheesy central-party-district offices (I suspect to manipulate the fact that it's the first time in their lives these people have felt wanted), I would have thought that the challenges of the big issues of the day, like climate change, land use, habitat loss etc ought to have squeezed some sort of useful start-up innovation from these guys. But no, it's mostly about monitoring people in factories so they don't slack off, analysing adverts and mind-control. Slow handclap from this engineer.

[bjn]

In terms of things that are "cool" and "funky" enough to entice silicon valley engineers away from their comfortable hypercheesy central-party-district offices (I suspect to manipulate the fact that it's the first time in their lives these people have felt wanted), I would have thought that the challenges of the big issues of the day, like climate change, land use, habitat loss etc ought to have squeezed some sort of useful start-up innovation from these guys. But no, it's mostly about monitoring people in factories so they don't slack off, analysing adverts and mind-control. Slow handclap from this engineer.

If there's a way to make money doing it, they'll do it. Capitalism innit, no-one is going to throw millions/billions at a load of developers unless they get a return. So here's some software aimed at making the world a better place (well wind farms more efficient), through making people money.

Silicon Valley is a run and owned by a pit of greedy vipers and nasty goblins who all need to get in the sea.

[sheldrake]

Ah, so an engineer is someone who brings in lots of revenue for their employer. So a banker is a financial engineer. Gotcha.

The reason some silicon valley firms make so much money is that they are gruesome oppressive monopolies making the world a worse place, rather than because innovative capitalism is awesome.

Gruesome oppressive hyper-efficient monopolies.

Capitalism gets better the more of it you've got in your pocket.

Yes, some of the more sentimental/naive/PR-concious people do piss away time and money on fashionable/pointless stuff like renewable energy, but its a bit like when an investment banker does 2 hours work in a soup kitchen on Christmas day.

The secret is not to care.

[Vertigowooyay]

Capitalism gets better the more of it you've got in your pocket.

Yes, some of the more sentimental/naive/PR-concious people do piss away time and money on fashionable/pointless stuff like renewable energy, but its a bit like when an investment banker does 2 hours work in a soup kitchen on Christmas day.

The secret is not to care.

[sheldrake]

plodder trolled me first. he knows exactly what I do for a living.

[plodder]

I do indeed. Sales.

[sheldrake]

You wouldn't understand.

[jimbob]

Ah, so an engineer is someone who brings in lots of revenue for their employer. So a banker is a financial engineer. Gotcha.

The reason some silicon valley firms make so much money is that they are gruesome oppressive monopolies making the world a worse place, rather than because innovative capitalism is awesome.

"Fintech" as a concept annoys me - that's getting a larger share of the cake in a zero-sum game, with innovative approaches to get around regulations.

However silicon valley is different, as miniturisation means that it has historically been possible to reduce the cost of computing power drastically and open up applications that were utterly impractical even thirty years ago. That *is* innovation, and *can* make wealth without exploiting people. It is not applicable to some types of engineering. Also, sometimes the business model is not good when applied to more safety-critical systems (I'm looking at you Uber and your self-driving car attempts).

[dyqik]

Ah, so an engineer is someone who brings in lots of revenue for their employer. So a banker is a financial engineer. Gotcha.

The reason some silicon valley firms make so much money is that they are gruesome oppressive monopolies making the world a worse place, rather than because innovative capitalism is awesome.

"Fintech" as a concept annoys me - that's getting a larger share of the cake in a zero-sum game, with innovative approaches to get around regulations.

However silicon valley is different, as miniturisation means that it has historically been possible to reduce the cost of computing power drastically and open up applications that were utterly impractical even thirty years ago. That *is* innovation, and *can* make wealth without exploiting people. It is not applicable to some types of engineering. Also, sometimes the business model is not good when applied to more safety-critical systems (I'm looking at you Uber and your self-driving car attempts).

First you should look at Uber for their "provide a taxi service" attempts and see if they can do that safely and without damaging effects.