|
SedanChair posted:If eight year olds could destroy America's workforce. But enough about financiers! 
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Zachack posted:I'd like a citation for that ranking process and as for the Patent Exam: FE % used to be really weird. Like, I just put "C" down the entire dynamics and statics sections excepting one or two trivial problems because as an EE I didn't even know what the symbols meant. Other engineering disciplines would have their equivalents. They've changed the exam around a bit now though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:FE % used to be really weird. Like, I just put "C" down the entire dynamics and statics sections excepting one or two trivial problems because as an EE I didn't even know what the symbols meant. Other engineering disciplines would have their equivalents. They've changed the exam around a bit now though. Yeah, the Elec./Comp. Engineering FE doesn't have dynamics or statics anymore: http://cdn3.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/FE-Ele-CBT-specs_with-ranges.pdf These are pass rates not score % but you can see the differences. quote:First-time takers (%)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
I don't remember the EE section having any material beyond what a sophomore would know, and that disappointed me.Trabisnikof posted:Yeah, the Elec./Comp. Engineering FE doesn't have dynamics or statics anymore: http://cdn3.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/FE-Ele-CBT-specs_with-ranges.pdf I kinda wish that version of the test existed when I took it years ago, because it looks hella more interesting and challenging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:I don't remember the EE section having any material beyond what a sophomore would know, and that disappointed me. The old FE's morning session was all stuff you'd get in sophomore level classes, I doubt you actually covered everything in the afternoon sessions before the end of your junior year (and remember - you can take it your senior year so that's how it's supposed to work).
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
wow, almost everyone who posted in here that claimed to be a software developer is kind of a smug twat huh? weird
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Just so you know "20 years of VMWare experience" is literally impossible. The company didn't exist 20 years ago. Which is why I assumed that example was histrionic hyperbole and didn't take it literally. Longer than the tech existed postings tend to be 5 years experience for a 3-4 year old language. The desired applicant will be an early adopter and have something they've agreed to treat as equivalent for the additional years. Or possibly literally be someone who helped invent the language/toolset in some (possibly very minor) way and as such can claim a head start on everyone else. computer parts posted:There is also a long standing and well noted phenomenon of HR people wanting a lot of conditions in an applicant that don't actually come into consideration in an interview for the position. And those conditions won't be technical because HR goons don't know what any of the tech stuff being asked for means so the just copy that stuff boilerplate and play word-match with resumes. They do know, however, what a college is and may insist on various levels of education or certification that may not be needed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:Prospective employers will look at you askance if you haven't passed or even attempted the FE exactly because it's just an overall final exam for the hodgepodge of things you were supposed to learn in your engineering academic career. Not in the vast majority of cases for Electrical Engineers, and from what I hear, they don't really care for Chemical Engineers either. H.P. Hovercraft posted:Student workers != Interns; most jurisdictions don't count student experience as valid toward licensure reqs. Civil and Mechanical only represent a tad under 40% of engineering degrees awarded each year. And MechEs don't really need it most of the time, since they usually work in industry. They don't give a poo poo if you're a PE if you design car axles or work in industrial reliability.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Flectarn posted:wow, almost everyone who posted in here that claimed to be a software developer is kind of a smug twat huh? weird Step 1: go into a thread that insults an entire profession Step 2: point out that people of that profession who care enough to defend themselves and their peers are "smug twats" Step 3: win SA ironic post of the year award
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Step 1: go into a thread that insults an entire profession I have to admit, I'm wondering what the ratio of engineers to software people in this thread is. I went to an engineering college and my husband has his degree in civil engineering so I've never called myself an engineer since I've never passed the EIT which I thought was necessary for the title. But I had no idea how emotional other engineers get over it. Let's try some engineering sperg bait. "I'm working on my patio now so I'm going to head out back and pour some concrete. Bye!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
I'm a solutions architect, I engineer solutions for critical business needs and improve our ROI by embracing dynamic processes *makes some more pivot tables*
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Did engineers exist before accreditation existed? Was the word "engineer" ever used before the ABET existed? Going by the title "software engineer" feels a little gross, but at the same time, I fail to see the difference between designing a system to reliably move data around with a high uptime and, say, designing a system that can be placed physically in a bedroom window and cool your room for less than $150. Being the person who fixes AC units doesn't make you an engineer, and neither does debugging someone's lovely code, but it's not the case that the entirety of your work as a "software engineer" consists of debugging someone's lovely code.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
I'm curious why a bunch of people seem to simultaneously want one of the best-paid professions to unionize and become even more better-paid and better-benefitting (thus separating them further from the rest of the working class) and at the same time are seemingly rooting for this profession to crash and "teach them a lesson" or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
EB Nulshit posted:at the same time, I fail to see the difference between designing a system to reliably move data around with a high uptime and, say, designing a system that can be placed physically in a bedroom window and cool your room Are marketers "language engineers"? edit: I mean there seems to be some difference between "engineering" as a physically constructive activity and the act of "thinking through an idea and making it happen". FRINGE fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Software Dev naturally attracts wannabe John Galts because they can be an 'Engineer' and an 'Architect' while putting in less effort than either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
EB Nulshit posted:Did engineers exist before accreditation existed? Was the word "engineer" ever used before the ABET existed? You'd have to define accreditation. Engineering societies existed before ABET and they had to be made up of engineers. Trains existed before ABET as well, so "Yes".
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
EB Nulshit posted:Did engineers exist before accreditation existed? Was the word "engineer" ever used before the ABET existed? Here's the wikipedia definition, which includes ABET's definition: quote:Engineering (from Latin ingenium, meaning "cleverness" and ingeniare, meaning "to contrive, devise") is the application of scientific, economic, social, and practical knowledge in order to invent, design, build, maintain, and improve structures, machines, devices, systems, materials and processes. The discipline of engineering is extremely broad, and encompasses a range of more specialized fields of engineering, each with a more specific emphasis on particular areas of applied science, technology and types of application. By these definitions, people who develop software can definitely be considered engineers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
There's a difference between someone designing a bridge and someone designing the UX for fart and burp piano.apk, I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what that difference is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:There's a difference between someone designing a bridge and someone designing the UX for fart and burp piano.apk, I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what that difference is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:06
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:There's a difference between someone designing a bridge and someone designing the UX for fart and burp piano.apk, I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what that difference is. Well, to be fair there's an entire field devoted to UX and none of them really go by engineer so you're going to have to come up with some better hyperbole
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
I didn't realize traditional engineers had such a strong inferiority complex wrt software engineers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:There's a difference between someone designing a bridge and someone designing the UX for fart and burp piano.apk, I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what that difference is. Ah, but you see some people are writing software for life support systems therefore
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I didn't realize traditional engineers had such a strong inferiority complex wrt software engineers. In Texas its a crime to call yourself a software engineer without an engineering license
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I didn't realize traditional engineers had such a strong inferiority complex wrt software engineers. Part of this stems from the fact that there a good portion of the curriculum for actually obtaining a PE license is about how to act ethically, and how to best serve the public. This includes not lying about your credentials or license, which can in fact be an actual civil or criminal penalty. It's been somewhat weakened over the years by use of the industrial exemption for titling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Well, to be fair there's an entire field devoted to UX and none of them really go by engineer so you're going to have to come up with some better hyperbole Someone should tell the 18021 job listings on LinkedIn for "User Experience Engineer" that they don't exist. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
down with slavery, aren't you a web dev anyway? Did all the PHP Engineers get phased out in favor of Node Samurai?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:Someone should tell the 18021 job listings on LinkedIn for "User Experience Engineer" that they don't exist. Surely you mean the same job posted 18021 times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:Someone should tell the 18021 job listings on LinkedIn for "User Experience Engineer" that they don't exist. User Experience Engineers do exist, but they are different from UX designers in that they actually develop software. In my company the two have very distinct skill sets and responsibilities. I realize of course that this is not an established standard, since UX itself is even newer than software engineering as a field.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
The point is that outside of people who are churning out terrifyingly obtuse ADA for DoD missile guidance and/or other similar software packages, the vast majority of "software engineers" don't have to abide by similar licensure because an unhandled exception in your fart app isn't going to loving kill someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Brannock posted:I'm curious why a bunch of people seem to simultaneously want one of the best-paid professions to unionize and become even more better-paid and better-benefitting (thus separating them further from the rest of the working class) and at the same time are seemingly rooting for this profession to crash and "teach them a lesson" or something. Alternatively, people are warning that if they don't unionize their future is lower wages and worse conditions. uncurable mlady posted:The point is that outside of people who are churning out terrifyingly obtuse ADA for DoD missile guidance and/or other similar software packages, the vast majority of "software engineers" don't have to abide by similar licensure because an unhandled exception in your fart app isn't going to loving kill someone. Which is why a PE for software engineers makes so much sense and why it is funny to watch other people "in the industry" fight it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Which is why a PE for software engineers makes so much sense and why it is funny to watch other people "in the industry" fight it. I agree, it's almost as if a lot of software developers are slavish devotees of Ayn Rand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I didn't realize traditional engineers had such a strong inferiority complex wrt software engineers. I'm neither and it really seems to be the other way around. The entire issue is about programmers claiming to be engineers and not vice versa. "That person I'm pretending to be is soooooo jealous of me, it's like, oh my god." Best Friends fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Sooo ... I'm comfortable admitting that the people who made fart.app are software devs. Do engineers admit that they make whoopee cushions, fabricate sex toys, and make ez bake ovens or do we pretend that these things spring forth fully formed from the head of Zeus? If so, is it fair to stereotype one of the two fields based on its best work and the other on its most trivial? Also, Therac 25 happened - for the folks out there who think software is all safe and friendly and harmless. http://courses.cs.vt.edu/professionalism/Therac_25/Therac_1.html McAlister fucked around with this message at 02:28 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
There're probably more software developers involved in low level embedded/kernel/realtime programming than there are engineers building bridges anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:There're probably more software developers involved in low level embedded/kernel/realtime programming than there are engineers building bridges anyway. Exactly. Most engineers I know don't even build anything. They are simply consultants.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Therac 25, which (if it isn't already) should be drilled into the skull of every CS freshman is a great example of why we should hold software devs to the same standards we hold engineers. The Toyota unintended acceleration case is another example of where better software engineering would have helped. I can't say for sure that accreditation and licensure would have made it better, but I also can't say it would have made things worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:Therac 25, which (if it isn't already) should be drilled into the skull of every CS freshman is a great example of why we should hold software devs to the same standards we hold engineers. If a carpenter does a shoddy job when building a chair, it can put someone in danger and might even kill them. Shall we hold carpenters to the same standards we hold engineers? Yep, I am unironically comparing carpenters to software developers. Because hey, apparently they are sooooo similar.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:There're probably more software developers involved in low level embedded/kernel/realtime programming than there are engineers building bridges anyway. /Sigh And if the GOP keeps throttling our infrastructure budgets at all levels of government ... /Sigh
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:Therac 25, which (if it isn't already) should be drilled into the skull of every CS freshman is a great example of why we should hold software devs to the same standards we hold engineers. Accreditation and a "PE for software engineers" is not going to result in "better software engineering". My school switched their CS major to software engineering. The result was extra courses on: - Software specification - Software design This comes at the cost of classes on: - Algorithms - Computer architecture And they don't offer a class on the theory of computation, because that's considered too theoretical. So the graduates from my school will not know what a Turing machine is, they won't know what a regular expression is, they won't know how a computer works, and they won't have any real algorithms knowledge. But they'll know how to write a design document.  And this is expected to be ABET-accredited. They had a reviewer come out when I was still there, and his feedback was very positive. Safe and Secure! fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:Therac 25, which (if it isn't already) should be drilled into the skull of every CS freshman is a great example of why we should hold software devs to the same standards we hold engineers. I've gotten a lot of informal training on these topics on the job as I've worked in industries where we were working on systems that impact health and safety. So corporate training. Didn't hear about Therac in school and only got ethics type stuff as a byproduct of being in an engineering college as they were required of everyone. /Shrug Also, keep in mind, a lot of devs skip the school route entirely so even if there were more classes they would have missed them. So corporate training does have the virtue if catching everyone though there are clearly some interest conflicts there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:18
|
|