5 ms·

I aggressively refuse to call myself an engineer. Programmer is fine. Developer is better, because programming is only a piece of it. Y’all can call yourselves

by psyc 5y ago

I aggressively refuse to call myself an engineer. Programmer is fine. Developer is better, because programming is only a piece of it. Y’all can call yourselves whatever you like, but inside I’m thinking you retconned an industry insider euphemism into a non-existent sub-type of engineering, by protesting all the ways you apply rigor to what we do.

mywittyname 5y ago
What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? Lots of people in other engineering disciplines build stuff with less rigor than is used to build software. Maybe load test it in Fusion 360 before sending the file to be milled. And lots of software companies test their stuff quite rigorously. People who write software have imposter syndrome. Other disciplines are not building things better than we do. For every Google there's a Ford, and for every scrappy startup there's a scrappy machine shop.
- urda 5y ago
  > What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? We are the actual Engineers. For US-Based IT workers, that means a degree from an ABET [1] backed institution with a traditional undergrad and graduate programs. Anyone else calling themselves an "engineer" while doing IT work are not. In addition: Readers need to remember this isn't reddit and downvoting comments with facts you do not like is not appropriate for Hacker News. It's is depressing this reminder needs to be added here for facts as it appears a few readers here have forgotten already. [1] https://www.abet.org/ https://www.abet.org/
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
    I would trust someone graduating with CS degree from non-ABET accredited Stanford rather than someone from ABET-accredited CS program of Athens State University.
    - urda 5y ago
      ... Except Stanford is ABET accredited, and as are all the major Engineering institutions and leaders. The fact that most users here are reaching to downvote literally the fact that leading Engineering institutions all fall in this bucket is absolutely depressing from this community. It's clear some feelings have been "hurt" here by other users having higher educations.
      - vitus 5y ago
        It's not all-or-nothing for the university -- some programs are not. "Like the CS department, the EE department is no longer ABET accredited. While such accreditation is useful in certain disciplines such as civil engineering, it has no practical significance whatsoever in computer science." https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/undergrad/Considering.shtml https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/undergrad/Considering.shtml Similarly, UC Berkeley also declined to renew their ABET acreditation for their EECS department, and so they haven't been ABET-accredited for the past few years. "Both of these programs are accredited by ABET through September 30, 2019, but because we have decided not to continue applying for ABET accreditation, we will be developing a single set of student learning outcomes for our department, rather than using the two sets of outcomes mandated by ABET for EECS departments. " https://eecs.berkeley.edu/academics/undergraduate/eecs-bs/objectives-outcomes https://eecs.berkeley.edu/academics/undergraduate/eecs-bs/ob...
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - lucumo 5y ago
    That's all just protectionism. Or an attempt at it, because it's clearly not working in the software industry. I am a graduate of such a school and it is a pain to even use that (earned and legally awarded) title in an international context because countries only recognise their own schools. Even in the EU, with its standardized EU-wide titles, you still can't use the "local" title of another country. Even if both titles are accredited to the same EU-title. It's all status games and protectionism. And it's a silly war to fight, because no one thinks a "software engineer" is an accredited engineer anymore anyway.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - cortesoft 5y ago
    Just because a private organization says they have monopoly on the word “engineer” doesn’t mean they actually do.
    - KnobbleMcKnees 5y ago
      Exactly this. Being told who the "real" engineers are is simply a good way of parting suckers with their money for "accreditation" or whatever such nonsense.
  - urda 5y ago
    Completely depressing looking back at this thread and realizing that Hacker News has an issue with users holding advance degrees. I expect this jealousy and hatred from sites like reddit and Facebook, it should not be tolerated here on HN. This is NOT ok behavior especially from the amount of work these graduates and institutions have pushed into our fields. There is a complete lack of respect here and it shows. You are not an engineer if you did not flow through an ABET institution. You're a developer, nothing wrong with that but you're not an Engineer. No, I do not care if your company has other certain titles, those are easily made up and have no academic backing. This behavior we're seeing here is the same as if I pretended I was an MD after taking a first-aid-class. It's disrespectful to those that put in the effort to expand our academic understandings and our capabilities for others to turn around and then pretend that title is their own. It is not.
- ByteJockey 5y ago
  > What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? For new grads? In my experience, they're usually miles behind an 18 year old who has been messing around in their spare time for a few years. There are, of course, exceptions, but at this point seeing something they don't teach at the local universities is more eye-catching on a resume than most degrees. It usually means they bothered to learn something on their own.
plandis 5y ago
Well crap, I guess I’m going to have to burn my diploma that clearly says I’m an electrical engineer.
hinkley 5y ago
Margaret Hamilton coined the term. But then again, anyone who can keep a lunar lander from turning into a new crater probably has more right to that term than most of us.
wruza 5y ago
Isn’t it easier to just stick to the term and not fight with it? Everyone involved knows that “software engineering” is not like “civil engineering”, and those who don’t, usually don’t know either. It has no legal nor practical sense, so why bother?
- qball 5y ago
  >It has no legal nor practical sense, so why bother? You might be surprised to know that it actually does matter, and it matters in a way that depresses American software engineer salaries: work visas. The fact that the US government considers "software engineering" to be equal to "civil engineering" means that the TN visa (since we're talking about Canada) applies to people qualified to be employed as software engineers in the US. As such, this visa allows tens of thousands of equally-qualified software engineers from Canada to compete for a good proportion of the same jobs thereby depressing American wages; why wouldn't an American software engineer (or a Canadian P.Eng who wants to make a business but can't afford the better engineers) be opposed to the weak American definition being the only one that really matters?
  - mook 5y ago
    Note that Computer Systems Analyst is a profession listed in NAFTA; I was at a company where they used that. Also, the NAFTA definition of Engineer doesn't require a P. Eng title. (https://www.nafsa.org/_/file/_/amresource/8cfr2146.htm https://www.nafsa.org/_/file/_/amresource/8cfr2146.htm was linked from state.gov)
- psyc 5y ago
  It didn’t used to bother me back when I could assume everyone else understood it was an industry specific title based on a metaphor! I even used to defend the title by saying, “Relax; it’s an industry-specific title, not a kind of engineer.” Like “Software Architect” is understood not to be a kind of architect. But over the last few years I’ve seen dozens of HNers lay out technical arguments for why they ARE engineers. So, I never took a single engineering class, have no engineering cert, don’t know much about the ethos, and barely even know the definition without looking it up. But I’m supposed to not rock the boat, and claim to be one, like I accidentally became an engineer in the course of designing, planning, fortifying, testing, and measuring software? Like Daniel-san accidentally became a karate master by waxing cars? Sorry, no. Our “engineering” is just another partially applicable metaphor for what software devs do. But software development is its own set of disciplines. It’s wonderful to pull helpful concepts from other disciplines, but I draw the line at coopting the whole designation.

by psyc 5y ago

mywittyname 5y ago

What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? Lots of people in other engineering disciplines build stuff with less rigor than is used to build software. Maybe load test it in Fusion 360 before sending the file to be milled. And lots of software companies test their stuff quite rigorously. People who write software have imposter syndrome. Other disciplines are not building things better than we do. For every Google there's a Ford, and for every scrappy startup there's a scrappy machine shop.

urda 5y ago
> What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? We are the actual Engineers. For US-Based IT workers, that means a degree from an ABET [1] backed institution with a traditional undergrad and graduate programs. Anyone else calling themselves an "engineer" while doing IT work are not. In addition: Readers need to remember this isn't reddit and downvoting comments with facts you do not like is not appropriate for Hacker News. It's is depressing this reminder needs to be added here for facts as it appears a few readers here have forgotten already. [1] https://www.abet.org/ https://www.abet.org/
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
  I would trust someone graduating with CS degree from non-ABET accredited Stanford rather than someone from ABET-accredited CS program of Athens State University.
  - urda 5y ago
    ... Except Stanford is ABET accredited, and as are all the major Engineering institutions and leaders. The fact that most users here are reaching to downvote literally the fact that leading Engineering institutions all fall in this bucket is absolutely depressing from this community. It's clear some feelings have been "hurt" here by other users having higher educations.
    - vitus 5y ago
      It's not all-or-nothing for the university -- some programs are not. "Like the CS department, the EE department is no longer ABET accredited. While such accreditation is useful in certain disciplines such as civil engineering, it has no practical significance whatsoever in computer science." https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/undergrad/Considering.shtml https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/undergrad/Considering.shtml Similarly, UC Berkeley also declined to renew their ABET acreditation for their EECS department, and so they haven't been ABET-accredited for the past few years. "Both of these programs are accredited by ABET through September 30, 2019, but because we have decided not to continue applying for ABET accreditation, we will be developing a single set of student learning outcomes for our department, rather than using the two sets of outcomes mandated by ABET for EECS departments. " https://eecs.berkeley.edu/academics/undergraduate/eecs-bs/objectives-outcomes https://eecs.berkeley.edu/academics/undergraduate/eecs-bs/ob...
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- lucumo 5y ago
  That's all just protectionism. Or an attempt at it, because it's clearly not working in the software industry. I am a graduate of such a school and it is a pain to even use that (earned and legally awarded) title in an international context because countries only recognise their own schools. Even in the EU, with its standardized EU-wide titles, you still can't use the "local" title of another country. Even if both titles are accredited to the same EU-title. It's all status games and protectionism. And it's a silly war to fight, because no one thinks a "software engineer" is an accredited engineer anymore anyway.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- cortesoft 5y ago
  Just because a private organization says they have monopoly on the word “engineer” doesn’t mean they actually do.
  - KnobbleMcKnees 5y ago
    Exactly this. Being told who the "real" engineers are is simply a good way of parting suckers with their money for "accreditation" or whatever such nonsense.
- urda 5y ago
  Completely depressing looking back at this thread and realizing that Hacker News has an issue with users holding advance degrees. I expect this jealousy and hatred from sites like reddit and Facebook, it should not be tolerated here on HN. This is NOT ok behavior especially from the amount of work these graduates and institutions have pushed into our fields. There is a complete lack of respect here and it shows. You are not an engineer if you did not flow through an ABET institution. You're a developer, nothing wrong with that but you're not an Engineer. No, I do not care if your company has other certain titles, those are easily made up and have no academic backing. This behavior we're seeing here is the same as if I pretended I was an MD after taking a first-aid-class. It's disrespectful to those that put in the effort to expand our academic understandings and our capabilities for others to turn around and then pretend that title is their own. It is not.
ByteJockey 5y ago
> What of those who graduated from engineering programs taught at engineer colleges? For new grads? In my experience, they're usually miles behind an 18 year old who has been messing around in their spare time for a few years. There are, of course, exceptions, but at this point seeing something they don't teach at the local universities is more eye-catching on a resume than most degrees. It usually means they bothered to learn something on their own.

plandis 5y ago

Well crap, I guess I’m going to have to burn my diploma that clearly says I’m an electrical engineer.

hinkley 5y ago

Margaret Hamilton coined the term. But then again, anyone who can keep a lunar lander from turning into a new crater probably has more right to that term than most of us.

wruza 5y ago

Isn’t it easier to just stick to the term and not fight with it? Everyone involved knows that “software engineering” is not like “civil engineering”, and those who don’t, usually don’t know either. It has no legal nor practical sense, so why bother?

qball 5y ago
>It has no legal nor practical sense, so why bother? You might be surprised to know that it actually does matter, and it matters in a way that depresses American software engineer salaries: work visas. The fact that the US government considers "software engineering" to be equal to "civil engineering" means that the TN visa (since we're talking about Canada) applies to people qualified to be employed as software engineers in the US. As such, this visa allows tens of thousands of equally-qualified software engineers from Canada to compete for a good proportion of the same jobs thereby depressing American wages; why wouldn't an American software engineer (or a Canadian P.Eng who wants to make a business but can't afford the better engineers) be opposed to the weak American definition being the only one that really matters?
- mook 5y ago
  Note that Computer Systems Analyst is a profession listed in NAFTA; I was at a company where they used that. Also, the NAFTA definition of Engineer doesn't require a P. Eng title. (https://www.nafsa.org/_/file/_/amresource/8cfr2146.htm https://www.nafsa.org/_/file/_/amresource/8cfr2146.htm was linked from state.gov)
psyc 5y ago
It didn’t used to bother me back when I could assume everyone else understood it was an industry specific title based on a metaphor! I even used to defend the title by saying, “Relax; it’s an industry-specific title, not a kind of engineer.” Like “Software Architect” is understood not to be a kind of architect. But over the last few years I’ve seen dozens of HNers lay out technical arguments for why they ARE engineers. So, I never took a single engineering class, have no engineering cert, don’t know much about the ethos, and barely even know the definition without looking it up. But I’m supposed to not rock the boat, and claim to be one, like I accidentally became an engineer in the course of designing, planning, fortifying, testing, and measuring software? Like Daniel-san accidentally became a karate master by waxing cars? Sorry, no. Our “engineering” is just another partially applicable metaphor for what software devs do. But software development is its own set of disciplines. It’s wonderful to pull helpful concepts from other disciplines, but I draw the line at coopting the whole designation.