4 ms·

> Only if you're a certified Engineer Not really. If you've got a CS or SE degree you are certainly an engineer. If you've built systems and worked in the indu

> Only if you're a certified Engineer Not really. If you've got a CS or SE degree you are certainly an engineer. If you've built systems and worked in the industry solving difficult problems you are an engineer. In the US we don't need an expensive piece of paper telling us what we're qualified to call ourselves. EDIT: To be clear I'm referring to software engineering. Not all engineering. I thought that was obvious based on the context of the post but I guess not.

Dirlewanger 12y ago
Problem with that is that, at least compared to actual engineers who need to take the FE exam to be called one, it's a complete misnomer and to be frank, a little embarrassing. Most CS/SE programs share no classes with engineering programs except maybe calc 1/2 and one or two others. It just feels wrong referring to myself as a software engineer because a. there's no formal definition of one and b. it's unfair to those who actually are engineers. I didn't slog through statics/Differential EQs/vibrations/Calc 3/Mechatronics/Embedded Systems/etc. like some of my friends, and on a nominal level it's unfair to them.
- toephu2 12y ago
  But I was a CS major and had to slog through diff. EQs, calc, physics, linear algebera, etc..
  - tjl 12y ago
    In Canada, it would be against the law for a CS major to call oneself an "engineer". At the University of Waterloo, there's actually a Software Engineering program that's joint between the CS and Electrical & Computer Engineering departments. It's been licensed by the accreditation board for engineering programs.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
codeonfire 12y ago
There are some legal restrictions in some places so that apartment buildings and bridges don't get built by the local guy with a backhoe and then collapse.
- cortesoft 12y ago
  If they hire a software engineer to build a bridge, they have more problems than the job title. I don't really follow this argument, since it isn't like all the 'certified' engineers are interchangeable. You would have just as many problems if you hired an electrical engineer to build your bridge as you would if you hired a non-certified software developer to do it. Are people really worried about software developers trying to illegally build building? I mean, we don't legally limit who can call themselves an engineer in the US, but you still need certifications to actually BUILD something that requires engineering work. That seems like a much more effective control than limiting who can call themselves engineers.
tjl 12y ago
Did you have to take a course on ethics? What about software and society? In Canada, in order to get accreditation as an engineering program (including software engineering) there's a set of requirements to be taught. One is a course on technology's impact on society. Also, in Ontario in order to get professionally licensed as an engineer (which is required before you can call yourself an engineer, legally) one has to take an exam on ethics & law as they pertain to engineering. So, we study case law and various ethical situations. People have been taken to court for calling themselves engineers if they're not officially licensed. This is why the MCSE is no longer an acronym as there was a court case about it. There's a few kinds of engineers that don't have to be licensed as they pre-date the law (e.g., stationary engineers who take care of things like boilers), but they typically have their own regulatory organizations.
- cbhl 12y ago
  In California, people call themselves "Software Engineers" all willy-nilly (even if they haven't graduated from high school) because the term isn't regulated down here.
- swatow 12y ago
  Can you give an example of an ethical problem that might be faced by a software engineer, that is covered by these courses, and that these courses would enable a person to deal with significantly better.
  - ktran03 12y ago
    I took that ethics course. I don't think that course really made much of a difference in anyone's career. The material was mostly common sense ethical questions.
  - tjl 12y ago
    There were definitely a number in both the practice law and ethics exam and the official exam that I took. I can't recall them off-hand, though. You can see the Code of Ethics for Professional Engineers Ontario in the actual law. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900941_e.htm http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900... See section 77. Generally, it often revolves around 77.2.i, "A practitioner shall, regard the practitioner’s duty to public welfare as paramount" One could see a conflict come up between the company's and the public's interest. For example, you get asked to write the code in a way that takes less time, but could expose the client's data to hackers.
stygiansonic 12y ago
The certification is more than just "an expensive piece of paper". In some jurisdictions (Canada), an engineering accreditation board has to certify that the courses taught during the course of obtaining an engineering degree contain certain material - thus enforcing a standard across all degrees, regardless of the university/institution. Without this, it's arguable that having an "engineering degree" (in a certain discipline, say software eng) from one university would not all be comparable to having one from another institution - thus decreasing the overall quality of the industry. I'm not saying having the standard solves all these sort of problems, but I am saying that it makes things better.

Dirlewanger 12y ago

Problem with that is that, at least compared to actual engineers who need to take the FE exam to be called one, it's a complete misnomer and to be frank, a little embarrassing. Most CS/SE programs share no classes with engineering programs except maybe calc 1/2 and one or two others. It just feels wrong referring to myself as a software engineer because a. there's no formal definition of one and b. it's unfair to those who actually are engineers. I didn't slog through statics/Differential EQs/vibrations/Calc 3/Mechatronics/Embedded Systems/etc. like some of my friends, and on a nominal level it's unfair to them.

toephu2 12y ago
But I was a CS major and had to slog through diff. EQs, calc, physics, linear algebera, etc..
- tjl 12y ago
  In Canada, it would be against the law for a CS major to call oneself an "engineer". At the University of Waterloo, there's actually a Software Engineering program that's joint between the CS and Electrical & Computer Engineering departments. It's been licensed by the accreditation board for engineering programs.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

codeonfire 12y ago

There are some legal restrictions in some places so that apartment buildings and bridges don't get built by the local guy with a backhoe and then collapse.

cortesoft 12y ago
If they hire a software engineer to build a bridge, they have more problems than the job title. I don't really follow this argument, since it isn't like all the 'certified' engineers are interchangeable. You would have just as many problems if you hired an electrical engineer to build your bridge as you would if you hired a non-certified software developer to do it. Are people really worried about software developers trying to illegally build building? I mean, we don't legally limit who can call themselves an engineer in the US, but you still need certifications to actually BUILD something that requires engineering work. That seems like a much more effective control than limiting who can call themselves engineers.

tjl 12y ago

Did you have to take a course on ethics? What about software and society? In Canada, in order to get accreditation as an engineering program (including software engineering) there's a set of requirements to be taught. One is a course on technology's impact on society. Also, in Ontario in order to get professionally licensed as an engineer (which is required before you can call yourself an engineer, legally) one has to take an exam on ethics & law as they pertain to engineering. So, we study case law and various ethical situations. People have been taken to court for calling themselves engineers if they're not officially licensed. This is why the MCSE is no longer an acronym as there was a court case about it. There's a few kinds of engineers that don't have to be licensed as they pre-date the law (e.g., stationary engineers who take care of things like boilers), but they typically have their own regulatory organizations.

cbhl 12y ago
In California, people call themselves "Software Engineers" all willy-nilly (even if they haven't graduated from high school) because the term isn't regulated down here.
swatow 12y ago
Can you give an example of an ethical problem that might be faced by a software engineer, that is covered by these courses, and that these courses would enable a person to deal with significantly better.
- ktran03 12y ago
  I took that ethics course. I don't think that course really made much of a difference in anyone's career. The material was mostly common sense ethical questions.
- tjl 12y ago
  There were definitely a number in both the practice law and ethics exam and the official exam that I took. I can't recall them off-hand, though. You can see the Code of Ethics for Professional Engineers Ontario in the actual law. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900941_e.htm http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900... See section 77. Generally, it often revolves around 77.2.i, "A practitioner shall, regard the practitioner’s duty to public welfare as paramount" One could see a conflict come up between the company's and the public's interest. For example, you get asked to write the code in a way that takes less time, but could expose the client's data to hackers.

stygiansonic 12y ago

The certification is more than just "an expensive piece of paper". In some jurisdictions (Canada), an engineering accreditation board has to certify that the courses taught during the course of obtaining an engineering degree contain certain material - thus enforcing a standard across all degrees, regardless of the university/institution. Without this, it's arguable that having an "engineering degree" (in a certain discipline, say software eng) from one university would not all be comparable to having one from another institution - thus decreasing the overall quality of the industry. I'm not saying having the standard solves all these sort of problems, but I am saying that it makes things better.