|
Back in the early 80s (can't speak to much earlier or later since that is when I was in college) most of the major technical colleges (one of which I was attending) referred to their programming degrees as Software Engineering.
Why? Most likely because there were two camps, science and engineering, and you had to be in one or the other. The Computer Science side, which included both hardware and software, was much more abstract and theoretical and, at the time, tended not to produce people doing the actual work.
The disappearance of SE degrees in favor of CS degrees and the "developer" moniker came later as programming degrees proliferated. Probably because the other engineering programs derided software engineering as a degree for people who couldn't hack being "real" engineers so both sides felt the need for an amicable divorce.
Given what started happening at that time, I'm sure many of those newly minted SE's were crying all the way to the bank a few short years later.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: "Senior Firewall Engineer."
sounds to me like a fancy bricklayer.
Also the apocryphal
Yesterday I couldn't spell Engineer. Today I are one!
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: "Senior Firewall Engineer."
So...an almost-retired brick layer?
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes (most of the time) I am dense. I missed the joke. 
good morning
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never been comfortable calling myself an engineer, but it's because I view programming as more of an art, a knack.
What I mean is with a system of any significant complexity things get complex rather than complicated in software, and the ability to repeat the project with a different set of developers is effectively nil.
Sure you can fulfill the same functional requirements, but the software will work entirely differently.
The electrical engineers I work with produce highly repeatable designs, for lack of a better way to express what I'm talking about.
And if I put a different team of engineers on the same project replicated twice, the results, while not identical, will be much more consistent between the two teams than they are with software.
That's not how I would define engineering though - like I don't want to commit a no true scotsman fallacy here. Rather, I'm trying to give an example where programming is more ... organic? messy? at the end of the day non-repeatable.
So among other reasons, that's why I'm uncomfortable with the term "software engineer", especially as it applies to me and the way I code.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
- "Programmer", "software developer" and "software engineer" are often lumped together and mean the same thing: a person who creates and modifies software. I don't have an issue with candidates describing themselves using any of these terms.
- Unlike software engineers, electrical, mechanical, civil, aeronautical and other types of engineers work with extremely well defined specifications. Experienced software engineers will design for extensibility and robustness (for example by building loosely coupled components) but this isn't guaranteed. Consequently, software often evolves in a manner that eventually causes it to become overly complicated and difficult or impossible to maintain, requiring The Great Rewrite.
- We software developers could learn a lot from the folks who engineered the modern day lightbulb. I can use a modern tri-light LED bulb in a 1960s lamp without worrying about compatibility. The tri-light feature may not work if the socket doesn't support it, but the lamp's operation will gracefully degrade to a simpler behavior. Granted, software is more complex, but you've gotta give credit to the designers of the light bulb and the machines that allow light bulbs to be manufactured, for designing for change.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
honest assessment. But the point of the post was - tongue in cheek - what is a firewall engineer. The general consensus is a brick layer  .
This is the lounge folks, you are failing me.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: his is the lounge folks, you are failing me.
Apologies! 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
You make an interesting point about the lightbulb.
Is your point that we need to design new systems so that they comfortably interface with old systems?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I was advocating designing software in a way that makes it easier to extend and change, when change is warranted. Some ways of achieving this is by modularity, maintaining separation of concerns, abstraction, loose coupling and encapsulation. While following these principles won't guarantee the software we build will be easy to extend and modify, not doing any of these things will almost certainly ensure that it will be difficult to extend the software.
cf: Bob Martin's story about the Sword C++ debugger.
Clean Code with Uncle Bob Episode 1[^]
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Ravi Bhavnani wrote: Unlike software engineers, electrical, mechanical, civil, aeronautical and other types of engineers work with extremely well defined specifications.
Tell me you never worked for pharmaceutical, food safety, automotive, avionics, naval, trainlines and biomedical without telling it.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
My old man (who was a civil engineer) would be laughing in his grave looking at some of the people who call themselves engineers. He would also smack me silly if I called myself a "software engineer", even from the grave I suspect.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they are looking for someone with construction experience or car engineering to help design a true firewall.
Computer networking adopted firewall as a good stand in from other industries that worried about actual fires: in the adjacent apartment or the engine compartment.
|
|
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more - I am not even comfortable with the term "Software Engineer".
"If engineers built like programmers code the first wood pecker that came along would destroy civilization."
I forget who said it, but it's so true. It reminds me of peons giving themselves grander and grander titles to stroke their egos. FYI - I am a programmer, and I take offense at being called a "Software Engineer".
Engineers work for a living, programmers copy paste code from StackOverflow for a living.
|
|
|
|
|
Probably a typo, "Senior Firewball Engineer". Think Gandalf.
|
|
|
|
|
Back in the good old days - you know, the 1600s - "computer" was clearly defined as a person: one who calculates, a reckoner, one whose occupation is to make arithmetical calculations.
It seems these days (ie: 1897 and on) they'll randomly assign that term to any old bucket of bolts that can perform a mathematical or logical operation.
WTF indeed!
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Before I got to be a Computer Programmer, I spent four years as a Mechanical Engineer. I've never understood why "engineer" got thrown into the mix.
I was happy with "programmer". And fine with "Software Developer". But no... "engineer" is a bit of a stretch. 
I'm with your dad on this.
modified 14hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
I vote for "code monkey".
|
|
|
|
|
In the UK a guy with a mastic gun can be called an engineer. One came to our house a few years ago to fix a leak on the roof of a conservatory his company had recently installed.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree - the term has become very loose - too loose in my opinion. The word is regularly being appropriated - maybe to make someone appear smarter than they are (?) but I don't really know the reasoning. I have sat in meetings where attendees hand out business cards that say "Systems Engineer", and I ask them the standard small-talk questions, like "Where did you go to school?" and "What was your major?". Regarding their major, I've heard everything from "Business" to "Accounting" to "Marketing" to "Management". They often start squirming and come up with some justification saying, "Well, I've been around engineering and engineers for a long time." Yeah, I've been around doctors a long time, but you wouldn't want me doing your vasectomy.
|
|
|
|
|
Related to the humorous aspect of this post, I have a friend who worked in the building industry in the UK mostly as a bricklayer. He told me he had a series of jobs working in crematoriums building the “ovens” with special fireproof bricks. I guess he’d qualify as a firewall engineer!
On a more serious note, I’ve said b4 on this forum, the use of the term “engineer” is highly regulated in most jurisdictions (I’m familiar with Canada, USA & UK). You cannot call yourself an engineer unless u have a recognized engineering degree & you have met the conditions to get a license to practice such as a P.Eng.(Canada), P.E.(US) or C.E.(UK) or similar elsewhere. If you call yourself an engineer without a license & you are reported, the relevant governing body (e.g. Professional Engineers Ontario where I live) will pursue you. It’s usually people like those who call themselves HVAC engineers who fix furnaces & A/C units that get in trouble but I have seen one or two cases where something similar to software engineer got someone in trouble. In most cases, the resolution is a warning to stop using the term engineer but I’ve seen cases where the courts fined those ignoring the warning.
|
|
|
|
|
Those of us who are Navy Nucs deal with this topic a lot. The academic depth and rigor of Naval Nuclear Power School, combined with the “hands on” training in prototype, lends itself to whether we are/were “engineers”.
When I worked as a control systems engineer with Barber-Colman, the PEs I associated with referred to me as an engineer, but not as a PE.
They relied on me for the theoretical, analytical, and operational information related to control systems (particularly computerized ones), mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, and computer systems engineering, without any criticism of me not being a PE.
I never represented myself to them as PE, explained I was a Navy Nuc with 2 years of college in chemistry and physics. Usually, they were sold at "Navy Nuc".
From https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/engineer
engineer, noun, en.dʒɪˈnɪr
- a person whose job is to design or build machines, engines, or electrical equipment, or things such as roads, railways, or bridges, using scientific principles:
- a civil engineer
- a mechanical/structural engineer
- a software engineer
- a person whose job is to repair or control machines, engines, or electrical equipment:
- a computer engineer
- The engineer is coming to repair our phone tomorrow morning.
- a train driver
Professional Engineer
from https://www.nspe.org/resources/licensure/what-pe
To use the PE seal, engineers must complete several steps to ensure their competency.
- Earn a four-year degree in engineering from an accredited engineering program
- Pass the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam
- Complete four years of progressive engineering experience under a PE
- Pass the Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) exam
Sticking to the actual meaning of the word “engineer”, those of us who design and build software using scientific principles are, indeed, engineers.
There is a good argument to be given in the context of software, that coders are not software engineers.
By being a “coder”, I do not mean a programmer who just mindlessly churns code out of some “stream of consciousness”. I mean it to primarily be one who thoughtfully writes code, uses design patterns and other “that’s how most everyone else does it” processes, rather than apply good engineering principles to develop according to a well-thought out plan that is flexible enough to accommodate changes along the way.
Being a coder seems to be the most prevalent with traditional HTML/CSS/JavaScript programming where the pressures of production, or the lack of interest in the engineering aspect of making web front ends, bypass the benefits of engineering. But I see it more and more on the backend, too.
In my experience, the application of value engineering is the most overlooked aspect of implementing software engineering.
Whether to work our software projects (or even just individual tickets) as engineers or coders is a choice. Engineering a project takes a little more time than coding, but the value returned from engineering is almost always noticeably greater over the full SDLC than just coding.
|
|
|
|
|
When I started working at IBM in 1979, my job title was Field Engineer.
I was neither an Engineer nor a landscaper.
At some point the Engineering community complained that non-Engineers were being called Engineers. IBM changed our title to Customer Service Representative.
As for Firewall Engineer, I agree. What the elephant?
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
My main mode of wheeled transportation involves a vehicle built and sold by Hyundai. I therefore subscribe to their "MyHyundai" service which allows me remote access to functions of the car from the comfort of my Android phone.
I pay about US$199 per year for that.
Now the app is telling me that I can't use it because I must first upgrade to the latest version of the app.
But the Google Play store tells me that the latest version of the app is not compatible with my phone. So I either upgrade my phone or I can't use the MyHyundai service at all.
This must be the kind of problem that you get when an application is created by code monkeys.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
