5 ms·
Well, because we develop more value than structural engineers faster than they do and have killed far fewer people than they have. Essentially, we’re economical
by scarejunba 8y ago
Well, because we develop more value than structural engineers faster than they do and have killed far fewer people than they have. Essentially, we’re economically more efficient so a 10% improvement in our performance is huge, while a 10% improvement in structural engineer performance is a waste of time for the cost incurred.
Therefore, software engineers get a lot more attention in terms of how to increase efficiency. The difference is akin to why there’s so much work to get CEOs to be more efficient but not that much work to get janitors to be efficient. It’s not a value judgment. It’s just economical reality.
- phakding 8y agoSure bud! "We" developing more value (whatever that means) is equivalent to that of a stock trader on an open outcry floor thinking they develop country's economy.
- scarejunba 8y agoMarket value, not the abstract concept of value. Stock traders that make lots of money definitely count as developing more value in the sense I was talking about. That is, money earned to the firm.
- zb 8y agoA less glib way of putting this is that in structural engineering construction costs dwarf design costs, while in software engineering the reverse is true. If your construction phase consists of "type 'make' and grab a coffee" and the most expensive part is the coffee, then any efficiencies you can find in the design process will make a big difference to your bottom line. If your construction phase costs tens of millions of dollars, you'll want to invest in designing more efficient construction methods rather than worry about tweaking the design process.