3 ms·
It seems endemic to software to me that people constantly want to brand things as "engineering" that aren't. They always want to call it engineering because it
by zmmmmm 1y ago
It seems endemic to software to me that people constantly want to brand things as "engineering" that aren't. They always want to call it engineering because it sounds better but they don't want to do nearly anything associated with engineering - rigorous process control, systematic documentation, specification of tolerances, resource usage etc etc.
What's described here is mostly a list of barely disguised tips, tricks and heuristics. It's all fine until someone wants to put it in production and suddenly a "real" engineer has to take over and do the actual engineering.
(and yes, I'm old - and grumpy!)
- bachmeier 1y agoAnyone believing software engineering is a legitimate term should also accept context engineering as a legitimate term. Wikipedia's definition of engineering includes "The creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination" and context engineering as the term is used definitely qualifies if software engineering does.
- jjmarr 1y agoLicensed engineers accept responsibility for those structures/machines/etc when they physically harm or kill others. Like lawyers or doctors being sued for malpractice. A typical person does not understand scientific principles and cannot validate whether a bridge is safe before using it. An engineer that approves a bridge can be held liable when that bridge fails, even if they had orders from their boss or company. If you're not prepared to accept personal liability when your code kills someone or causes a disaster, you shouldn't try to be an engineer. I live in a country (Canada) where software engineering is legally considered engineering and that's what officially distinguishes a "software engineer" from a "software developer". In practice, I rarely see the rule followed.
- rester324 1y agoYeah, and wikipedia also states that engineering is a decision making process (often iterative) in which the engineering sciences, basic sciences and mathematics are applied to convert resources optimally to meet a stated objective. So which scientific principles do context engineering apply? There is none. So yeah. It's not engineering at all.
- zmmmmm 1y agoI accept most of your point - that engineering has a much broader definition than what I'm alluding to. But the part I'll quibble with is the extent to which there are "scientific principles" involved here. This seems almost entirely empirical to me.
- wasabi991011 1y agoI don't believe it was empirically checked either tbh, just anecdata
- d_tr 1y ago"Context Architect" is probably going to be a job title soon. Stay tuned!
- jalapenos 1y agoFollowed by "Chief Context Executive"
- jalapenos 1y agoJournalist - word engineer Doctor - body engineer Lawyer - court engineer Plumber - pipe engineer Gardener - plant engineer Politician - lie engineer Psychotherapist - feelings engineer Criminal - crime engineer Chef - food engineer Baby - cry engineer Dog - woof engineer You see, we're all engineers.