4 ms·

I used to be an IT guy at a structural and civil engineering firm. Those were real professional engineers with stamps and liability. As long as "SWEs" do not h

I used to be an IT guy at a structural and civil engineering firm. Those were real professional engineers with stamps and liability. As long as "SWEs" do not have stamps and legal liability, they are not real (professional) engineers, IMHO. My point is that I believe to earn the title of "Software Engineer," you should have a stamp and legal liability. We done effed up. This breach of standards might be the great filter. edit: Thanks to the conversation down-thread, the possibly obvious solution is a Software Professional Engineer, with a stamp. This means full-stack is actually full effing stack, not any bullshit. This means that ~1% to ~5% of SWE would be SWPE, as it is in other engineering domains. A SWPE would need to sign off on anything actually important. What is important? Well we figured that out in other engineering domains. It's time for software to catch the f up.

bruce511 2y ago
Ok, so overnight all programmers stop calling themselves Engineers. [1] What problem does that solve? I fix bugs all day, but I don't call myself a Software Doctor. Frankly whether software people call themselves engineers or not matters to pretty much no-one (except actual engineers who have stamps and liabilities.) Creating a bunch of requirements and liability won't suddenly result in more programmers getting certified and taking on liability. It'll just mean they stop using that title. I'm not sure that achieves anything useful. We'd still have the exact same software coming from the exact same people. [1] for the record I think 'software engineer' is a daft title anyway, and I don't use it. I don't have an engineering degree. On the other hand I have a science degree and I don't go around calling myself a data scientist either.
- consumer451 2y ago
  That's fine, it just means that devs without stamps can't sign off on anything actually important. In real engineering, there is a difference between an Engineer and a Professional Engineer. The latter has a stamp. I realize that this is the nearly the opposite of our current environment. It is a lot more regulation, a lot more professional standards... but it worked for civil and structural, and those standards were written in blood. Maybe what I am asking for is a PE for SWE, those people have stamps, and it would be really hard to get a SW PE. Anything deemed critical (like security), by regulation, would require a SW PE stamp. [0] Software did in-fact eat the world. Why shouldn't it have any legal/professional liability like civil and structural engineering? [0] In this case, full stack, actually means full freaking stack = SWPE
  - bruce511 2y ago
    >> That's fine, it just means that devs without stamps can't sign off on anything actually important For some definition of important. But let's follow your thought through. Who decides what is important? You? Me? The developer? Yhe end-user? Some regulatory body? Is Tetris important? OpenSSL? Notepad ++? My side project on github? If my OSS project becomes important, and I now need to find one of your expensive engineers to sign off on it, take liability for it, do you think I can afford her? How could they be remotely sure that the code is OK? How would they begin to determine if its safe or not? >> Software did in-fact eat the world. Why shouldn't it have any legal/professional liability like civil and structural engineering? Because those professions have shown us why that model doesn't scale. How many bridges, dams etc are built by engineers every year? How does that compare to the millions of software projects started every year? In the last 30 years we've pretty much written all the code, on all the platforms, in use today. Linux, Windows, the web, phones, it's all less than 35 years old. What civil engineering projects have been completed in the same time scale? A handful of new skyscrapers? You are basically suggesting we throw away all software ever written and rebuild the world based on individual's prepared to take on responsibility and legal liability for any bugs they create along the way? I would suggest that not only would this be impossible, not only would it be meaningless, but it would take centuries to get to where we are right now. With just as many bugs as there are now. But, yay, we can bankrupt an engineer every time a bug is exploited.
    - consumer451 2y ago
      This has all been done before in mechanical, structural, and civil engineering. People die and then regulatory and industry standards fix the problems. We do not need to re-invent the concepts of train engine, bridge, and dam standards again. I mean, I guess we actually do. The issue is that software has not yet killed enough people for those lessons to be learned. We are now at that cliff's edge [0], [1]. Another problem might be that software influence is on a far more hockey-stick-ish growth curve than what we dealt with in mechanical, civil, and structural engineering. Meanwhile, our tolerance for professional and governmental standards seems to be diminishing. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39918245 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39918245 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24513820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24513820 ... https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hospital+ransomware https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hospital+ransomware
petre 2y ago
> As long as "SWEs" do not have stamps and legal liability, they are not real (professional) engineers When and if that happens I’ll move to carpentry. Good luck. Tech is already full of *it. The only thing short of making it even worse is stamps and a mafia-like org issuing the stamps and asking for contributions in return, like it happens in the fields of medical care, law, book keeping, architecture or civil engineering. The companies should certify the products which require certification instead and get liability insurance.
tonetegeatinst 2y ago
I think in certain ways you are right we need those standards and stamps. But also colleges need to be very clear and cease calling it software engineering as it implies the expertise of a engineer. Computer engineering degrees can sorta get away with this, as they have quite a bit of engineering classes they have to take, but I'm not sure if they can call themselves engineers legally. Its hard because I believe certain titles are protected like doctor,lawyer,engineer, but last I check it varied by state in the USA at least. Sidenote: sometimes people get a computer science degree, or they he a cyber security degree, or even cyber warefare degree. All three seem to be used interchangeably in the security field. On one hand I get how formal protected titles help uphold standards and create trust, but it also enforces the grip colleges have and it creates more barriers to entering a field. Some States require 3 years experience to get a state permit for certain activities, when a federal permit is already needed so in that case its just more paperwork. Imagine if we started demanding people who build houses, not the guy who designed it but the builders to be an engineer, so we can trust their work and ability to do a job in the correct manner? At what point do we sacrifice and pass legislation in the name of reliability and safety?
_zephyr 2y ago
I actually looked into PE for software a while back. Are you aware that this was indeed a thing and was actually discontinued back in 2019 due to lack of participants? https://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2018/ncees-ends-software-engineering-pe-exam https://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2018/ncees-en...

bruce511 2y ago

Ok, so overnight all programmers stop calling themselves Engineers. [1] What problem does that solve? I fix bugs all day, but I don't call myself a Software Doctor. Frankly whether software people call themselves engineers or not matters to pretty much no-one (except actual engineers who have stamps and liabilities.) Creating a bunch of requirements and liability won't suddenly result in more programmers getting certified and taking on liability. It'll just mean they stop using that title. I'm not sure that achieves anything useful. We'd still have the exact same software coming from the exact same people. [1] for the record I think 'software engineer' is a daft title anyway, and I don't use it. I don't have an engineering degree. On the other hand I have a science degree and I don't go around calling myself a data scientist either.

consumer451 2y ago
That's fine, it just means that devs without stamps can't sign off on anything actually important. In real engineering, there is a difference between an Engineer and a Professional Engineer. The latter has a stamp. I realize that this is the nearly the opposite of our current environment. It is a lot more regulation, a lot more professional standards... but it worked for civil and structural, and those standards were written in blood. Maybe what I am asking for is a PE for SWE, those people have stamps, and it would be really hard to get a SW PE. Anything deemed critical (like security), by regulation, would require a SW PE stamp. [0] Software did in-fact eat the world. Why shouldn't it have any legal/professional liability like civil and structural engineering? [0] In this case, full stack, actually means full freaking stack = SWPE
- bruce511 2y ago
  >> That's fine, it just means that devs without stamps can't sign off on anything actually important For some definition of important. But let's follow your thought through. Who decides what is important? You? Me? The developer? Yhe end-user? Some regulatory body? Is Tetris important? OpenSSL? Notepad ++? My side project on github? If my OSS project becomes important, and I now need to find one of your expensive engineers to sign off on it, take liability for it, do you think I can afford her? How could they be remotely sure that the code is OK? How would they begin to determine if its safe or not? >> Software did in-fact eat the world. Why shouldn't it have any legal/professional liability like civil and structural engineering? Because those professions have shown us why that model doesn't scale. How many bridges, dams etc are built by engineers every year? How does that compare to the millions of software projects started every year? In the last 30 years we've pretty much written all the code, on all the platforms, in use today. Linux, Windows, the web, phones, it's all less than 35 years old. What civil engineering projects have been completed in the same time scale? A handful of new skyscrapers? You are basically suggesting we throw away all software ever written and rebuild the world based on individual's prepared to take on responsibility and legal liability for any bugs they create along the way? I would suggest that not only would this be impossible, not only would it be meaningless, but it would take centuries to get to where we are right now. With just as many bugs as there are now. But, yay, we can bankrupt an engineer every time a bug is exploited.
  - consumer451 2y ago
    This has all been done before in mechanical, structural, and civil engineering. People die and then regulatory and industry standards fix the problems. We do not need to re-invent the concepts of train engine, bridge, and dam standards again. I mean, I guess we actually do. The issue is that software has not yet killed enough people for those lessons to be learned. We are now at that cliff's edge [0], [1]. Another problem might be that software influence is on a far more hockey-stick-ish growth curve than what we dealt with in mechanical, civil, and structural engineering. Meanwhile, our tolerance for professional and governmental standards seems to be diminishing. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39918245 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39918245 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24513820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24513820 ... https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hospital+ransomware https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hospital+ransomware

petre 2y ago

> As long as "SWEs" do not have stamps and legal liability, they are not real (professional) engineers When and if that happens I’ll move to carpentry. Good luck. Tech is already full of *it. The only thing short of making it even worse is stamps and a mafia-like org issuing the stamps and asking for contributions in return, like it happens in the fields of medical care, law, book keeping, architecture or civil engineering. The companies should certify the products which require certification instead and get liability insurance.

tonetegeatinst 2y ago

I think in certain ways you are right we need those standards and stamps. But also colleges need to be very clear and cease calling it software engineering as it implies the expertise of a engineer. Computer engineering degrees can sorta get away with this, as they have quite a bit of engineering classes they have to take, but I'm not sure if they can call themselves engineers legally. Its hard because I believe certain titles are protected like doctor,lawyer,engineer, but last I check it varied by state in the USA at least. Sidenote: sometimes people get a computer science degree, or they he a cyber security degree, or even cyber warefare degree. All three seem to be used interchangeably in the security field. On one hand I get how formal protected titles help uphold standards and create trust, but it also enforces the grip colleges have and it creates more barriers to entering a field. Some States require 3 years experience to get a state permit for certain activities, when a federal permit is already needed so in that case its just more paperwork. Imagine if we started demanding people who build houses, not the guy who designed it but the builders to be an engineer, so we can trust their work and ability to do a job in the correct manner? At what point do we sacrifice and pass legislation in the name of reliability and safety?

_zephyr 2y ago

I actually looked into PE for software a while back. Are you aware that this was indeed a thing and was actually discontinued back in 2019 due to lack of participants? https://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2018/ncees-ends-software-engineering-pe-exam https://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2018/ncees-en...