Scrutable

dyqik wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:34 pm

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:29 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:45 pm

dyqik wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:34 pm

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:29 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:37 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:41 pm Ah - that'll be it. <waits patiently for a decent IR website....>

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:38 pm 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 wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:52 pm

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:45 pm

dyqik wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 2:34 pm

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 wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:37 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:03 pm They're struggling for recognition if their STEM peers aren't sure if what they do is engineering or not.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:23 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:42 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:38 pm 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.

sheldrake wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:22 pm 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.

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:38 pm 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.

jimbob wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:03 pm

plodder wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:38 pm 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).