3 ms·

It works the other way around, the designers design and the engineers are figuring out how to build it. Unless of course you can shove it down the throat of the

by mrtksn 3y ago

It works the other way around, the designers design and the engineers are figuring out how to build it. Unless of course you can shove it down the throat of the customers, then you can have engineers make you an apparatus and call it a product. The designers usually have some understanding on what's possible and they work with the engineers to tweak their design for feasibility. No one cares about the 100 hundred drawings of skyscrapers. The soviets did it with the commie blocks, although practical its nowhere nearly as desirable as having a neighbourhood designed by people thinking beyond structural engineering.

robertlagrant 3y ago
> people thinking beyond structural engineering It's not "beyond". It's just a different job, and generally speaking, one with a lower bar to entry. Doesn't mean it's not useful, but I think it's silly to talk as though this sort of design is so significant. Plenty of ugly buildings exist; all designed by architects.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  Well, these days you plug the numbers into the computer and can tell you how to build your design. For most purposes, the engineering is there only because of associations or organisations lobbying the government making it compulsory. It's not an original work after all, the computations are modelled into the software and it tells you if it will meet the requirements.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > For most purposes, the engineering is there only because of associations or organisations lobbying the government making it compulsory. Definitely not. An engineer signs off the safety etc. All the non-cosmetics. You're right that it's computerised, but that's because it's not fashion - there's an objective "better" and so that can be programmed. Fashion, not so much. Until AI.