7 ms·

> If you want to be a software engineer and you do not have any code to present in an interview, you can not call yourself a programmer. That's just bollocks f

• bluemooner 7y ago
  > If you want to be a software engineer and you do not have any code to present in an interview, you can not call yourself a programmer. You can still call yourself a Computer Scientist, but there's a difference between the two.
  • clarry 7y ago
    Only if you're doing computer science. What I do is primarily programming.
  • MaxBarraclough 7y ago
    You can call yourself a computer scientist if you have at least one serious computer science publication to your name. You seemed to be implying that the bar for calling yourself a computer scientist is lower than the bar for calling yourself a programmer. The opposite is true. Also, not all computer scientists are in the business of writing code.
    • pinkfoot 7y ago
      Nonsense, People call themselves chemists, geologists, etc. without ever publishing anything. Ditto computer scientists.
      • MaxBarraclough 7y ago
        I'm aware that some people want to cheapen the word. 'Scientist' isn't a protected title. Anyone is legally permitted to claim the term. That doesn't mean that everyone with a science-related bachelor's degree is really a scientist. 'Scientist' is meant to mean 'person who does science'. Roughly speaking, that means someone who produces research papers. If someone says I've been a scientist for ten years, they mean to say they've been doing science for ten years. They do not mean merely that they were awarded a Bachelor of Science degree ten years ago. This is less of an issue in, say, bridge engineering. The term 'engineer' is (in some jurisdictions) a protected term, reserved for proper chartered engineers. If you have a better word for people who make a profession of doing science, I'd like to hear it.
        • pinkfoot 7y ago
          Why? 1) Its the long-accepted term - its what the universities put on your Bachelor of SCIENCE certificate. Part of our rich oral history if you will. 2) Research chemists don't suddenly start using the term 'chemistry scientist'. They are all just chemists. No hang-ups.
          • MaxBarraclough 7y ago
            > Its the long-accepted term - its what the universities put on your Bachelor of SCIENCE certificate We're not talking about the word science, we're talking about the word scientist. It is indeed a long-accepted term. Scientist means someone who does science. It does not mean someone with a basic grounding in the field, which is what a BSc indicates. With few exceptions, scientists hold PhDs. That is, after all, the point of a PhD. If you get a BSc in computer science and then make a billion dollars selling fidget-spinners, your Wikipedia article will describe you as an 'entrepreneur'. There's no way it would describe you as a 'scientist'. > Research chemists don't suddenly start using the term 'chemistry scientist'. They are all just chemists. Chemists are scientists by definition, and the same thing applies here. Holding a BSc in chemistry does not make you a chemist. Doing chemistry, and presumably publishing papers, makes you a chemist. As with the distinction between computer science and software engineering, there is a distinction between chemistry and chemical engineering.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• madhadron 7y ago
  Not to mention if you have been in, say, the NSA. Then the answer to "do you have any code you can show us?" may be "No, and I can't talk about it."
• MaxBarraclough 7y ago
  No need for an example as extreme as the NSA. If you've worked for years developing proprietary code of any sort, you cannot share it. One's personal GitHub portfolio is a completely different beast than one's professional accomplishments.
  • bluemooner 7y ago
    For a senior position I agree, but this changes if we're talking about a junior role.