3 ms·

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 mars

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.

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.