4 ms·
That's a very funny take - but I wonder how architects feel about it, because I'm pretty sure that there is similar stuff happening when designing houses... Th
by hooby 3y ago
That's a very funny take - but I wonder how architects feel about it, because I'm pretty sure that there is similar stuff happening when designing houses...
The biggest difference though probably is, that the architect who creates the blue prints - will not be involved in the actual construction work. Therefore the blue-print (which the customer signed off on) has to be ground truth.
- brudgers 3y agoIt’s similar, because clients are clients. But with a good chance of not being paid. And with direct personal liability that cannot be shielded with a corporate entity; and professional license requirements; and building codes enforced by governments… And of course if you fuck up, people may die. The article captures another aspect of architecture as well: ordinary people assume living in a house and using buildings gives them informed opinions on architectural matters. But that’s just people.
- moooo99 3y agoBut isn’t the risk you’re describing mostly tied to the actual engineer implementing or adjusting the design the architects come up with? No clue how that works in the US, but here most of the calculations are being done by an engineer with a different education than an architect.
- brudgers 3y agoNo.