4 ms·

I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach t

I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach to the research. It requires a very deep understanding of complex systems, formal reasoning, and emergent behavior. On the other end of the spectrum, I know people who got a degree completed unrelated to STEM, and through some on-the-job training managed to work their way into reasonably successful careers doing routine web development, or similar things. That certainly looks more like a trade. It's a marketable, valuable skill. They had to put some effort into something like an apprenticeship. But it's not exactly half their life training for a formal engineering discipline either. There are plenty of respectable ways to make a living in the software world that don't require a 4-year degree from en engineering school. I don't think we should pretend otherwise or force people into the way we got our education. I'm more on the engineering side, but I'm very passionate about my work, and not everyone needs to be like that. Some people just want to make a living and focus on other things in life.

freeflight 9y ago
> I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach to the research. It requires a very deep understanding of complex systems, formal reasoning, and emergent behavior. In Germany, there are two different flavors for the apprenticeship to "Fachinformatiker" (Computer Science Expert): One for software development and one for systems integrations, there's even a sub-specialization for "support".
- posterboy 9y ago
  The translation "expert" is ridiculous. Its an apprenticeship at college level, not a doctorate. I have no idea what the american equivalent is, because there might not be a standardized title, and maybe expert is not a protected title. Fachinformatiker is more of a technician with 1.5y of school and 1.5y on the job training interleaved.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    FWIW, Google translates it as "IT Specialist". That sounds accurate for what you're describing.
  - freeflight 9y ago
    > The translation "expert" is ridiculous. Not my translation, it's the "official" translation from the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce [0]. > I have no idea what the american equivalent is, because there might not be a standardized title, and maybe expert is not a protected title. I don't think there is a US equivalent to the German "Fachinformatiker", just like there's generally no real US equivalent to the German apprenticeship system. Imho Fachinformatiker as an apprenticeship is a good approach because not every IT job needs to be on an academic level, no reason to lock a whole field of work behind the entry-barrier of having an academic title/university education. [0] https://www.darmstadt.ihk.de/produktmarken/aus_und_weiterbildung_channel/ausbildung_channel/Anlagen_Artikel/englische_berufsbezeichnungen/2535860 https://www.darmstadt.ihk.de/produktmarken/aus_und_weiterbil...
alphaalpha101 9y ago
>I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach to the research. It requires a very deep understanding of complex systems, formal reasoning, and emergent behavior. Is it engineering then? Or is it scientific? Because they're not the same thing.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  Having a scientific approach to one aspect of the field's literature is hardly saying you're a scientist. But then some people do refer to themselves as computer scientist. But we're really getting caught up in titles too much, IMO.
  - alphaalpha101 9y ago
    Programmers are not computer scientists, and computer science is no more equivalent to software engineering than physics is equivalent to civil engineering. Programmers are also not, in general, software engineers. It's not about getting 'caught up in titles' either, IMO. It's an important distinction. Computer science programmes get flack for not teaching practical software engineering skills, which is totally unreasonable. Just as we have physics programmes, we should have proper computer science programmes. You are allowed to do a physics degree and offer physics courses without people going 'but how do I design bridges??'. Yet every computer science lecturer will tell you they've had people ask 'but what does this have to do with making websites??'.
    - TallGuyShort 9y ago
      I guess I'm just confused why you take issue with the phrase "a scientific approach to the research"? You don't see people applying the scientific method and academic rigor to papers in that part of the software field? That doesn't make them scientists, but I didn't claim it did.

freeflight 9y ago

> I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach to the research. It requires a very deep understanding of complex systems, formal reasoning, and emergent behavior. In Germany, there are two different flavors for the apprenticeship to "Fachinformatiker" (Computer Science Expert): One for software development and one for systems integrations, there's even a sub-specialization for "support".

posterboy 9y ago
The translation "expert" is ridiculous. Its an apprenticeship at college level, not a doctorate. I have no idea what the american equivalent is, because there might not be a standardized title, and maybe expert is not a protected title. Fachinformatiker is more of a technician with 1.5y of school and 1.5y on the job training interleaved.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  FWIW, Google translates it as "IT Specialist". That sounds accurate for what you're describing.
- freeflight 9y ago
  > The translation "expert" is ridiculous. Not my translation, it's the "official" translation from the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce [0]. > I have no idea what the american equivalent is, because there might not be a standardized title, and maybe expert is not a protected title. I don't think there is a US equivalent to the German "Fachinformatiker", just like there's generally no real US equivalent to the German apprenticeship system. Imho Fachinformatiker as an apprenticeship is a good approach because not every IT job needs to be on an academic level, no reason to lock a whole field of work behind the entry-barrier of having an academic title/university education. [0] https://www.darmstadt.ihk.de/produktmarken/aus_und_weiterbildung_channel/ausbildung_channel/Anlagen_Artikel/englische_berufsbezeichnungen/2535860 https://www.darmstadt.ihk.de/produktmarken/aus_und_weiterbil...

alphaalpha101 9y ago

>I think there's a spectrum. People who optimize file systems, for example: that's on the "engineering" side of the spectrum. It requires a scientific approach to the research. It requires a very deep understanding of complex systems, formal reasoning, and emergent behavior. Is it engineering then? Or is it scientific? Because they're not the same thing.

TallGuyShort 9y ago
Having a scientific approach to one aspect of the field's literature is hardly saying you're a scientist. But then some people do refer to themselves as computer scientist. But we're really getting caught up in titles too much, IMO.
- alphaalpha101 9y ago
  Programmers are not computer scientists, and computer science is no more equivalent to software engineering than physics is equivalent to civil engineering. Programmers are also not, in general, software engineers. It's not about getting 'caught up in titles' either, IMO. It's an important distinction. Computer science programmes get flack for not teaching practical software engineering skills, which is totally unreasonable. Just as we have physics programmes, we should have proper computer science programmes. You are allowed to do a physics degree and offer physics courses without people going 'but how do I design bridges??'. Yet every computer science lecturer will tell you they've had people ask 'but what does this have to do with making websites??'.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    I guess I'm just confused why you take issue with the phrase "a scientific approach to the research"? You don't see people applying the scientific method and academic rigor to papers in that part of the software field? That doesn't make them scientists, but I didn't claim it did.