6 ms·

I agree with the general point of this article. Showing that you have the skill to accomplish a job effectively will get you a job most anywhere. There's a maj

I agree with the general point of this article. Showing that you have the skill to accomplish a job effectively will get you a job most anywhere. There's a major issue when this is applied to a certain class of problems in ML and Data Science that people tend to ignore. If you could get a job as a civil or mechanical engineer (building bridges or whatnot) by showing that you built a small bridge in your backyard... We'd have some unstable bridges. If hospitals just let residents run the hospital... We'd have a lot of mistreated illnesses. If you could show a realty company that you can build a recommendation engine and they hire you to build their advertisement algorithm... Suddenly you're breaking housing discrimination laws. I am all for folks being able to get jobs from their cool projects. But we need ethical standards and educational standards before folks are given large, real-world problems to work with. We need to take a page out of engineering and medical playbooks and build official education or apprenticeship requirements. We need to have licenses that can be revoked if someone fails to follow ethical or quality standards. So - love creative people getting jobs. Now give them a high-quality education program along with those jobs.

berti 8y ago
A good start would be only actual professional engineers calling themselves engineers.
- klipt 8y ago
  You'd need a professional accreditation body for software engineers then.
  - umichguy 8y ago
    Wasn't this tried/mooted a few years ago but got nowhere in the end? But you also have to understand that for many/most of these types of professional bodies in other fields, you need to have a basic BS type degree to be accredited and this is where I think it fell down flat as quite a few SWEs (compared to other fields) were self-taught, dropped out etc. and didn't necessarily have a college degree. Maybe they can have a different set of criteria for SW field.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      > quite a few SWEs (compared to other fields) were self-taught, dropped out etc. and didn't necessarily have a college degree. Accreditation isn't just for enforcing a minimum standard of education - it's primarily so that people can actually be held responsible for bad decisions, and so that they have leverage over their bosses (it's harder to find an actual engineer or a doctor willing to do unethical things for you, when they could lose their license over it).
      - umichguy 8y ago
        I totally agree with your point. But unfortunately/ fortunately, those other fields you mention do require a degree as a minimum. But again, they also tend to have larger consequences (usually), compared to a few bad lines of code (usually).
- ascar 8y ago
  In Germany enigneer ("Ingenieur") is a protected profession title and I was granted the right to use it with my B.Sc. in Compsci (though a B.Sc. in Germany is also a lot more focused than undergrad in US afaik). I have no idea how many people in IT use the enigneer title without being entitled to, because in contrast to e.g. construction engineers there is no "Kammer" (guild?) for software engineers. There is also higher need for programmers ("developers") than for actual engineers.
Ma8ee 8y ago
This is the problem of a lot of software development. Look, this bright young man just built a wooden box all by himself. Let’s employ him to build our new shed. A shed is just a big box, isn’t it? This bright young man just built a shed. A house is just a big shed, isn’t it? He’ll figure out isolation, electricity and plumbing when we get to those parts...
- kkarakk 8y ago
  tbh your analogy doesn't work. modern software dev would mean that if the house can get by without isolation and plumbing until it needs to, then it will. when the requirement comes up then extra dev resources will be hired to plug them in. as long as you managed to get the frame up and the wiring complete, the other components are superfluous as long as someone is happy to stay in that house. then you can add isolation, then you can add plumbing. this is part of the "if you're not unhappy with the first version of your product then you've launched too late" philosophy and it does work in non critical sectors
  - Ma8ee 8y ago
    And you are kind of illustrating my point. Building a house requires a lot of additional considerations. Like what kind of daylight you get in different rooms, that maybe the toilet shouldn’t be in direct connection to the dining area, how the kids’ rooms are located relativ to the living room. And you will probably have to redo 70% of the work with the kitchen if you don’t start with making sure that the plumbing is in place. (Someone who knows more about houses than I do can come up with much better examples. For this exact reason I’m consulting an architect before I start renovating my house, even though I’m perfectly competent to both remove and put up a drywall myself.) Of course people learn with experience, and luckily redoing things in software development is cheap compared with when building houses. But that’s the only reason we get away with it. My point is, we would build better and cheaper systems if we from the start acknowledge that we have to take into account completely different sets of considerations when we move up the scale. A shed isn’t just a big box, a house isn’t just a big shed, etc.
    - 8y ago
povertyworld 8y ago
Programming is the last decent job that doesn't have a bunch of artificial barriers to entry put up to protect privileged people from competition from the industrious poor. The day I need a license from the government to own a compiler is the day I check out of this life.
- flexie 8y ago
  Hope that by ‘this life’ you mean the life of a software developer.
  - povertyworld 8y ago
    That sounded bad. If programming becomes illegal, I'll focus on graphic design. Short of a bolshevik style coup, they won't be able to ban that in the United States.
- pragmacoders 8y ago
  Does it bother you that every day, your personal information is transferred between a massive number of services created, maintained and secured by individuals with no security or ethical training whatsoever? That personal information is then sold to even more organizations that need no scientific or statistical basis, again with no ethical oversight, to make decisions that impact your future and the future of those around you. Picking up a compiler will never be banned anymore than it is banned to pick up a scalpel. But to call yourself a doctor you'd accept the responsibility (ethical and professional) that it entails. To call yourself a professional engineer you accept the responsibility that it entails. You hold yourself to a certain level of quality and ethics or you give up your right to hold the title. Without a standard level of responsibility there is no way to build any more of a foundation than we have. We will always have the rickety mess of data leaks, corruption, and general lack of accountability that we have now. We will have employers that can pressure programmers to go directly against their morals and ethics to get what they want. I'm not proposing that the poor be excluded from the field. I'm proposing that you not only give them a job but give them a pathway to a quality, independent education that will continue to prepare them for the major challenges they will be expected to face and the ethical questions that they'll have to make a stand on.
oriel 8y ago
This reminds me of the (relatively) recent post about breakdowns and descriptions of major and well-crafted applications. Link: http://aosabook.org/en/index.html http://aosabook.org/en/index.html A lot of Computer Science graduates, and/or self-taunt engineers are missing the commentary of 'masters' or senior people who can say why and why not this or that way. Just like the difference between building a bridge across a river and in your backyard is far more than just scaling up, seeing design patterns and common pitfalls writ large is one more step towards proper education needed for a modern programmer IMO.

berti 8y ago

A good start would be only actual professional engineers calling themselves engineers.

klipt 8y ago
You'd need a professional accreditation body for software engineers then.
- umichguy 8y ago
  Wasn't this tried/mooted a few years ago but got nowhere in the end? But you also have to understand that for many/most of these types of professional bodies in other fields, you need to have a basic BS type degree to be accredited and this is where I think it fell down flat as quite a few SWEs (compared to other fields) were self-taught, dropped out etc. and didn't necessarily have a college degree. Maybe they can have a different set of criteria for SW field.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > quite a few SWEs (compared to other fields) were self-taught, dropped out etc. and didn't necessarily have a college degree. Accreditation isn't just for enforcing a minimum standard of education - it's primarily so that people can actually be held responsible for bad decisions, and so that they have leverage over their bosses (it's harder to find an actual engineer or a doctor willing to do unethical things for you, when they could lose their license over it).
    - umichguy 8y ago
      I totally agree with your point. But unfortunately/ fortunately, those other fields you mention do require a degree as a minimum. But again, they also tend to have larger consequences (usually), compared to a few bad lines of code (usually).
ascar 8y ago
In Germany enigneer ("Ingenieur") is a protected profession title and I was granted the right to use it with my B.Sc. in Compsci (though a B.Sc. in Germany is also a lot more focused than undergrad in US afaik). I have no idea how many people in IT use the enigneer title without being entitled to, because in contrast to e.g. construction engineers there is no "Kammer" (guild?) for software engineers. There is also higher need for programmers ("developers") than for actual engineers.

Ma8ee 8y ago

This is the problem of a lot of software development. Look, this bright young man just built a wooden box all by himself. Let’s employ him to build our new shed. A shed is just a big box, isn’t it? This bright young man just built a shed. A house is just a big shed, isn’t it? He’ll figure out isolation, electricity and plumbing when we get to those parts...

kkarakk 8y ago
tbh your analogy doesn't work. modern software dev would mean that if the house can get by without isolation and plumbing until it needs to, then it will. when the requirement comes up then extra dev resources will be hired to plug them in. as long as you managed to get the frame up and the wiring complete, the other components are superfluous as long as someone is happy to stay in that house. then you can add isolation, then you can add plumbing. this is part of the "if you're not unhappy with the first version of your product then you've launched too late" philosophy and it does work in non critical sectors
- Ma8ee 8y ago
  And you are kind of illustrating my point. Building a house requires a lot of additional considerations. Like what kind of daylight you get in different rooms, that maybe the toilet shouldn’t be in direct connection to the dining area, how the kids’ rooms are located relativ to the living room. And you will probably have to redo 70% of the work with the kitchen if you don’t start with making sure that the plumbing is in place. (Someone who knows more about houses than I do can come up with much better examples. For this exact reason I’m consulting an architect before I start renovating my house, even though I’m perfectly competent to both remove and put up a drywall myself.) Of course people learn with experience, and luckily redoing things in software development is cheap compared with when building houses. But that’s the only reason we get away with it. My point is, we would build better and cheaper systems if we from the start acknowledge that we have to take into account completely different sets of considerations when we move up the scale. A shed isn’t just a big box, a house isn’t just a big shed, etc.
  - 8y ago

povertyworld 8y ago

Programming is the last decent job that doesn't have a bunch of artificial barriers to entry put up to protect privileged people from competition from the industrious poor. The day I need a license from the government to own a compiler is the day I check out of this life.

flexie 8y ago
Hope that by ‘this life’ you mean the life of a software developer.
- povertyworld 8y ago
  That sounded bad. If programming becomes illegal, I'll focus on graphic design. Short of a bolshevik style coup, they won't be able to ban that in the United States.
pragmacoders 8y ago
Does it bother you that every day, your personal information is transferred between a massive number of services created, maintained and secured by individuals with no security or ethical training whatsoever? That personal information is then sold to even more organizations that need no scientific or statistical basis, again with no ethical oversight, to make decisions that impact your future and the future of those around you. Picking up a compiler will never be banned anymore than it is banned to pick up a scalpel. But to call yourself a doctor you'd accept the responsibility (ethical and professional) that it entails. To call yourself a professional engineer you accept the responsibility that it entails. You hold yourself to a certain level of quality and ethics or you give up your right to hold the title. Without a standard level of responsibility there is no way to build any more of a foundation than we have. We will always have the rickety mess of data leaks, corruption, and general lack of accountability that we have now. We will have employers that can pressure programmers to go directly against their morals and ethics to get what they want. I'm not proposing that the poor be excluded from the field. I'm proposing that you not only give them a job but give them a pathway to a quality, independent education that will continue to prepare them for the major challenges they will be expected to face and the ethical questions that they'll have to make a stand on.

oriel 8y ago

This reminds me of the (relatively) recent post about breakdowns and descriptions of major and well-crafted applications. Link: http://aosabook.org/en/index.html http://aosabook.org/en/index.html A lot of Computer Science graduates, and/or self-taunt engineers are missing the commentary of 'masters' or senior people who can say why and why not this or that way. Just like the difference between building a bridge across a river and in your backyard is far more than just scaling up, seeing design patterns and common pitfalls writ large is one more step towards proper education needed for a modern programmer IMO.