3 ms·

Potentially both. If there are impossible constraints, then at a certain point you do _not_ build the impossible bridge, you say no instead.

spacemadness 1y ago
I am at a loss with all of the “well they were forced into it” comments. Don’t build it.
- david-gpu 1y ago
  Is it possible that the people who set the constraints are different from the people who design the bridge, who again are different from the people who approve the design? Yes, that's how it works in the real world. As a design engineer, all you can do is explain to the stakeholders how the constraints will affect the outcome and suggest alternatives. Ultimately, the engineers will have to work with what they are given, and as long as the outcome is safe and its limitations are communicated, they can't be blamed.
  - mathiaspoint 1y ago
    No one is going to pay you to work on something nice. They'd just do it themselves.
  - AnimalMuppet 1y ago
    The results weren't safe, so the engineers definitely can still be blamed.
- darth_avocado 1y ago
  Have you never worked on projects where the management wants to do things a certain way but you know it’s just plain wrong. The only option sometimes is to let the slow rolling disaster unfold or risk your own job. Obviously this only applies where you aren’t risking people’s lives, but there is an entire subreddit dedicated for this. (r/maliciouscompliance)
  - mathiaspoint 1y ago
    Part of the problem with the insane cost of living in first world countries is that saying no often means you probably don't get to live inside for the next few months. It tends to turn engineers into yes men. The ones who plan ahead tend to not end up in these organizations to begin with since they have leeway to say no much earlier.
  - ryandrake 1y ago
    This comes up all the time on HN about terrible, failed software projects, and the same excuses get brought up. "But engineers are forced to build it!" "It's really the Manager's fault!" "It's really the PM's fault!" The job of an Engineer implies a capacity for technical judgment and willingness to not do something if it's unsafe or doesn't make sense. Even if we're not official, licensed "Professional Engineers," we still need to make these calls and stop projects like this from happening. Whether it's building a ridiculous, unsafe bridge, or building ridiculous, defective software, if the engineer doesn't have the agency to stop it, who does? Just letting it happen and letting it fail with a "malicious compliance" smirk on our faces is passive aggressive, and doesn't elevate our profession.
    - whstl 1y ago
      The day landlords start accepting "integrity" and "elevating the profession" as payment for the rent is the day that engineers will do what you're saying. The only way to make this kind of thing work is by threatening to send people to jail. Like building-engineers having to report asbestos, or electricians being forced to report code violations and authorities actually following up on it. Of course regulation is like kryptonite for the engineering/HN crowd, so let's keep building shit on thoughts and prayers.
      - GuinansEyebrows 1y ago
        > The day landlords start accepting "integrity" and "elevating the profession" as payment for the rent is the day that engineers will do what you're saying. i don't think that's necessarily the case. civil engineering implies personal responsibility. we get to pretend like our bad choices don't have real-world impacts because we don't have a universal standards board or mandated ethical guidelines for computer engineering (in the vast majority of cases).
ajross 1y ago
"Seven Engineers fired for refusing to design bridge" Unemployment is a different constraint, but still a very real one. Doesn't matter now principled you are, there's always someone who'll take the money that isn't. Maybe these seven were the scabs and the heroes who said "no" are just forgotten.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  It's still bad engineering. "They made me do it" isn't an excuse.
  - ajross 1y ago
    That it's bad engineering isn't in dispute though. My point was that framing this as an "engineering decision" at all relies on context not included in the story. Someone who followed your Sound Engineering advice to the letter might be starving in the background of that photo. The problem is elsewhere.
  - cruffle_duffle 1y ago
    I mean say no, get fired, and somebody else will sign off on it. The broken bridge will get built regardless of you bravely taking a stand and destroying your career. You think the corrupt politicians didn’t know about the design of this bridge? It doesn’t take a genius engineer to see it’s fucked. That engineering signoff is a rubber stamp on a corrupt project. Fire the politicians not the person who has to rubber stamp it (because again, they’ll find somebody to signoff on it… the signoff is a mere formality on a project like this)

spacemadness 1y ago

I am at a loss with all of the “well they were forced into it” comments. Don’t build it.

david-gpu 1y ago
Is it possible that the people who set the constraints are different from the people who design the bridge, who again are different from the people who approve the design? Yes, that's how it works in the real world. As a design engineer, all you can do is explain to the stakeholders how the constraints will affect the outcome and suggest alternatives. Ultimately, the engineers will have to work with what they are given, and as long as the outcome is safe and its limitations are communicated, they can't be blamed.
- mathiaspoint 1y ago
  No one is going to pay you to work on something nice. They'd just do it themselves.
- AnimalMuppet 1y ago
  The results weren't safe, so the engineers definitely can still be blamed.
darth_avocado 1y ago
Have you never worked on projects where the management wants to do things a certain way but you know it’s just plain wrong. The only option sometimes is to let the slow rolling disaster unfold or risk your own job. Obviously this only applies where you aren’t risking people’s lives, but there is an entire subreddit dedicated for this. (r/maliciouscompliance)
- mathiaspoint 1y ago
  Part of the problem with the insane cost of living in first world countries is that saying no often means you probably don't get to live inside for the next few months. It tends to turn engineers into yes men. The ones who plan ahead tend to not end up in these organizations to begin with since they have leeway to say no much earlier.
- ryandrake 1y ago
  This comes up all the time on HN about terrible, failed software projects, and the same excuses get brought up. "But engineers are forced to build it!" "It's really the Manager's fault!" "It's really the PM's fault!" The job of an Engineer implies a capacity for technical judgment and willingness to not do something if it's unsafe or doesn't make sense. Even if we're not official, licensed "Professional Engineers," we still need to make these calls and stop projects like this from happening. Whether it's building a ridiculous, unsafe bridge, or building ridiculous, defective software, if the engineer doesn't have the agency to stop it, who does? Just letting it happen and letting it fail with a "malicious compliance" smirk on our faces is passive aggressive, and doesn't elevate our profession.
  - whstl 1y ago
    The day landlords start accepting "integrity" and "elevating the profession" as payment for the rent is the day that engineers will do what you're saying. The only way to make this kind of thing work is by threatening to send people to jail. Like building-engineers having to report asbestos, or electricians being forced to report code violations and authorities actually following up on it. Of course regulation is like kryptonite for the engineering/HN crowd, so let's keep building shit on thoughts and prayers.
    - GuinansEyebrows 1y ago
      > The day landlords start accepting "integrity" and "elevating the profession" as payment for the rent is the day that engineers will do what you're saying. i don't think that's necessarily the case. civil engineering implies personal responsibility. we get to pretend like our bad choices don't have real-world impacts because we don't have a universal standards board or mandated ethical guidelines for computer engineering (in the vast majority of cases).

ajross 1y ago

"Seven Engineers fired for refusing to design bridge" Unemployment is a different constraint, but still a very real one. Doesn't matter now principled you are, there's always someone who'll take the money that isn't. Maybe these seven were the scabs and the heroes who said "no" are just forgotten.

rsynnott 1y ago
It's still bad engineering. "They made me do it" isn't an excuse.
- ajross 1y ago
  That it's bad engineering isn't in dispute though. My point was that framing this as an "engineering decision" at all relies on context not included in the story. Someone who followed your Sound Engineering advice to the letter might be starving in the background of that photo. The problem is elsewhere.
- cruffle_duffle 1y ago
  I mean say no, get fired, and somebody else will sign off on it. The broken bridge will get built regardless of you bravely taking a stand and destroying your career. You think the corrupt politicians didn’t know about the design of this bridge? It doesn’t take a genius engineer to see it’s fucked. That engineering signoff is a rubber stamp on a corrupt project. Fire the politicians not the person who has to rubber stamp it (because again, they’ll find somebody to signoff on it… the signoff is a mere formality on a project like this)