4 ms·
I believe the comparisons between how engineering is practiced make this more than "silly". The purpose of the writing is not to answer that shallow question, b
by Conlectus 6y ago
I believe the comparisons between how engineering is practiced make this more than "silly". The purpose of the writing is not to answer that shallow question, but to better understand both fields.
- fjabre 6y agoWhen OP said that we are not 'real' engineers because we have not built a bridge is when I stopped reading. For how could anyone take him seriously after that? 'Real' engineers are not judged by whether or not they can build a bridge as if it's some rite of passage to being a real engineer. That's ridiculous on the face of it. That he used this example as some kind of proof to justify his argument is where he lost me.
- andrewchambers 6y agoNo need to tell us again about your lack of reading comprehension.
- fjabre 6y agoWho is 'us'? I'm speaking directly to you. Seems like you're just interested in name calling. When people resort to name calling it usually means they've lost the argument. But I'm sorry you're having a bad day. I'll leave it that. Thank you and take care.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- andrewchambers 6y agoSorry to be grumpy, but i did not read or understood the article at all like you did.
- Conlectus 6y agoThis was in reference to a quote from a software developer comparing software development to building a bridge. That is why "he has never built a bridge" was emphasized.