4 ms·

Also, it's a different scale of importance. GPs criticisms are fair but is anyone in their right mind really willing to pay for a bulletproof blog system? Most

Also, it's a different scale of importance. GPs criticisms are fair but is anyone in their right mind really willing to pay for a bulletproof blog system? Most software is simply not under the same set of requirements that these "real" engineers are. And where they are, you see more "real engineer behavior". The standards between Blogging, Banking, and Aerospace are each drastically different and sequentially more rigid. Thinking that we as software creators are failing because we're not holding ourselves to the standards of Aerospace and beyond feels like complaining that some high school kid working at McDonalds is not holding himself to 5 Star Restaurant standards. You get what you pay for. And you typically pay for what you (think you) need. edit: structure

fhood 7y ago
It's more than that. I'm a software dev, but I worked for a company that built machines for autonomous underwater titration (wtf chrome. How do you not know "titration"), and even in that nightmare of a task (moving parts, chemistry, batteries and underwater) it all ends up being way more consistent than software. When things fail, they tend to fail consistently and reliably, so building towards a reliable machine tends to be a simpler process. There is still complexity, (arctic and deep water applications), but often you can solve problems by just overbuilding the fuck out of it and not worrying.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  I'll bite... what are we titrating in the arctic and deep sea?
  - fhood 7y ago
    Scientific sea water analysis. Measuring nitrates, phosphates, ammonia etc..