4 ms·

This guy seems to think that engineers only make things that are dangerous. Sure, there are engineers that build bridges. But there are also enormous numbers

This guy seems to think that engineers only make things that are dangerous. Sure, there are engineers that build bridges. But there are also enormous numbers of computer engineers that build custom ASICs for, I dunno, TVs and Furbies. There are electrical engineers that build RF tag antennae for cartons in warehouses. There are chemical engineers who design more tasty marshmallows. On the other hand, there are also computer scientists who build software for nuclear power plants and fighter jets, which must be perfect or people will die. This is the problem with traditional engineering as a discipline: they require certification as a gatekeeping mechanism, under the pretense that some engineers do things that require safety protocols. Thus Real Engineers are certified to do Dangerous Work. To me engineering is simply the application of math and science to design and ultimately build. In this respect, computer scientists are inarguably engineers.

chongli 5y ago
A lot of those other things are (potentially) dangerous too. TVs and furbies with electronics in them could give you an electric shock or start a fire. Bad marshmallows could poison you or give you cancer. The people writing the software for power plants or jets should be licensed software engineers, not coding bootcamp alumni. The whole point of licensure is to add a degree of accountability to any job which involves danger to the public.
- exdsq 5y ago
  I believe the real core part of being a licensed engineer is you can be personally liable for mistakes in plans you sign off on, and to be able to do this you need to take exams and complete training showing you're capable of doing this correctly. This isn't a thing in programming.
  - chongli 5y ago
    It is a thing for software engineering students at University of Waterloo. They take physics and chemistry courses and learn all about safety and various standards. They write exams and at the end they become licensed professional engineers with iron rings.
    - exdsq 5y ago
      But there are very few software projects that have this level of rigor that I'm aware of, right? I've not heard of a project where a software engineer has had to sign off on it like a civil engineer signs off a bridge. Maybe they exist! But I've worked on critical systems and yet to see this in practice.
      - chongli 5y ago
        I think you’re right. However, I do know that CSPE [1] is trying to change this. It’s a bit of an uphill battle for them, though. Ideally (for them) there would be new laws in place mandating professionally certified software engineers signing off on projects. Having said that, it would probably take a bunch of high profile disasters to move the needle on the issue, politically speaking.
  - bcrosby95 5y ago
    This is pretty interesting to me. I think most software developers think of engineering as making sure the software will perform under stress. But this requirement is (usually) meaningless from a customer safety standpoint. Sure it sucks if the system breaks, but unless your business model is also safety critical, that failure isn't a safety problem. But leaking customer data is a safety problem. So for most people, software engineering should as much (or more) about security as things like time complexity tradeoffs.
- SeanLuke 5y ago
  > TVs and furbies with electronics in them could give you an electric shock or start a fire In no universe will a small low-voltage chip cause a fire except in exceptional circumstances. This is a non-dangerous product. But you can only design one if you are a certified engineer. Most engineering tasks are harmless. They require certification and licensing largely as a gateway mechanism, like being a beautician. No one says that people who design harmless products aren't "electrical engineers" or "computer engineers". Danger certainly isn't the defining feature of engineering -- gateway certification might be, but shouldn't be. And on the flip side, it is absolutely the case that for designing software which is potentially dangerous should require certification and liability considerations. Do these guys get to be called engineers then? What if all they do with their certification is make video games?
  - chongli 5y ago
    I don’t know what kind of batteries are in furbies but my childhood friend’s house burned down due to a battery charger catching fire. These were AA batteries recharging. It absolutely is the case that low voltage devices like AA batteries can catch fire if there is a short inside them when they’re charging.
writeslowly 5y ago
Sometimes when I read these the discussions I get the impression that software engineers think "real" engineering is about making life or death decisions all the time, but a lot of the work is so systematized it can turn into enormous amounts of paperwork. Especially as the things you work on become more deadly. Before I went into web development I worked briefly as a mechanical engineer on nuclear power plants, and I feel like I more critical thinking when I'm pushing code to prod than I ever did reviewing load calculations on coolant pipes (despite how important a functioning cooling system might actually be) Also want to point out that most aerospace engineers have no certification outside of a college degree, at least in the US.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  People focus on the life-or-death decisions because they are more dramatic, but really any time you are making physical devices you'd probably prefer a boring design. If you are planning to make a billion little computer chips to go in silly toys or whatever, you probably want to minimize the creativity for most of the design.
sdenton4 5y ago
This is exactly what's discussed as the misconception 'Engineering is high-consequence' in TFA: "It does mean that the engineers spent a lot of time on something that’s low-consequence or non-safety critical. In retrospect, this shouldn’t have surprised me. The world is vast and our industry is huge. Someone needs to design the bridges, yes, but someone also needs to design all of the little things we use in our day-to-day life. Much of the engineering there is low-stakes, low-consequence, just like much software is."
Gigachad 5y ago
>To me engineering is simply the application of math and science to design This still excludes the majority of what software engineers do. Sure, a little bit of it is carefully designed and applies complex math, but the majority isn't really math or science related at all.
hyperpape 5y ago
The article literally spends an entire section rejecting the belief that real engineers work only on dangerous things. The title is "Engineering is high-consequence", and discusses how one of the hardest problems an engineering team dealt on one project with was designing the handle for a device.

chongli 5y ago

A lot of those other things are (potentially) dangerous too. TVs and furbies with electronics in them could give you an electric shock or start a fire. Bad marshmallows could poison you or give you cancer. The people writing the software for power plants or jets should be licensed software engineers, not coding bootcamp alumni. The whole point of licensure is to add a degree of accountability to any job which involves danger to the public.

exdsq 5y ago
I believe the real core part of being a licensed engineer is you can be personally liable for mistakes in plans you sign off on, and to be able to do this you need to take exams and complete training showing you're capable of doing this correctly. This isn't a thing in programming.
- chongli 5y ago
  It is a thing for software engineering students at University of Waterloo. They take physics and chemistry courses and learn all about safety and various standards. They write exams and at the end they become licensed professional engineers with iron rings.
  - exdsq 5y ago
    But there are very few software projects that have this level of rigor that I'm aware of, right? I've not heard of a project where a software engineer has had to sign off on it like a civil engineer signs off a bridge. Maybe they exist! But I've worked on critical systems and yet to see this in practice.
    - chongli 5y ago
      I think you’re right. However, I do know that CSPE [1] is trying to change this. It’s a bit of an uphill battle for them, though. Ideally (for them) there would be new laws in place mandating professionally certified software engineers signing off on projects. Having said that, it would probably take a bunch of high profile disasters to move the needle on the issue, politically speaking.
- bcrosby95 5y ago
  This is pretty interesting to me. I think most software developers think of engineering as making sure the software will perform under stress. But this requirement is (usually) meaningless from a customer safety standpoint. Sure it sucks if the system breaks, but unless your business model is also safety critical, that failure isn't a safety problem. But leaking customer data is a safety problem. So for most people, software engineering should as much (or more) about security as things like time complexity tradeoffs.
SeanLuke 5y ago
> TVs and furbies with electronics in them could give you an electric shock or start a fire In no universe will a small low-voltage chip cause a fire except in exceptional circumstances. This is a non-dangerous product. But you can only design one if you are a certified engineer. Most engineering tasks are harmless. They require certification and licensing largely as a gateway mechanism, like being a beautician. No one says that people who design harmless products aren't "electrical engineers" or "computer engineers". Danger certainly isn't the defining feature of engineering -- gateway certification might be, but shouldn't be. And on the flip side, it is absolutely the case that for designing software which is potentially dangerous should require certification and liability considerations. Do these guys get to be called engineers then? What if all they do with their certification is make video games?
- chongli 5y ago
  I don’t know what kind of batteries are in furbies but my childhood friend’s house burned down due to a battery charger catching fire. These were AA batteries recharging. It absolutely is the case that low voltage devices like AA batteries can catch fire if there is a short inside them when they’re charging.

writeslowly 5y ago

Sometimes when I read these the discussions I get the impression that software engineers think "real" engineering is about making life or death decisions all the time, but a lot of the work is so systematized it can turn into enormous amounts of paperwork. Especially as the things you work on become more deadly. Before I went into web development I worked briefly as a mechanical engineer on nuclear power plants, and I feel like I more critical thinking when I'm pushing code to prod than I ever did reviewing load calculations on coolant pipes (despite how important a functioning cooling system might actually be) Also want to point out that most aerospace engineers have no certification outside of a college degree, at least in the US.

bee_rider 5y ago
People focus on the life-or-death decisions because they are more dramatic, but really any time you are making physical devices you'd probably prefer a boring design. If you are planning to make a billion little computer chips to go in silly toys or whatever, you probably want to minimize the creativity for most of the design.

sdenton4 5y ago

This is exactly what's discussed as the misconception 'Engineering is high-consequence' in TFA: "It does mean that the engineers spent a lot of time on something that’s low-consequence or non-safety critical. In retrospect, this shouldn’t have surprised me. The world is vast and our industry is huge. Someone needs to design the bridges, yes, but someone also needs to design all of the little things we use in our day-to-day life. Much of the engineering there is low-stakes, low-consequence, just like much software is."

Gigachad 5y ago

>To me engineering is simply the application of math and science to design This still excludes the majority of what software engineers do. Sure, a little bit of it is carefully designed and applies complex math, but the majority isn't really math or science related at all.

hyperpape 5y ago

The article literally spends an entire section rejecting the belief that real engineers work only on dangerous things. The title is "Engineering is high-consequence", and discusses how one of the hardest problems an engineering team dealt on one project with was designing the handle for a device.