General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums#ilooklikeanengineer - Who Doesn't ?
I work with (and for) some very accomplished , very talented female engineers. Designing and building spacecraft for some of the most challenging missions ever undertaken by human kind. I can imagine them having to put up with remarks like these.
#ilooklikeanengineer wants to challenge your ideas about who can work in tech
http://wapo.st/1JK8QtR
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,647 posts)As a former engineer myself (electronics engineer without portfolio) I K & R this message.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Put up w/ that shit all my life. Still putting up with it - overt and covert.
Grey
(1,581 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)PosterChild
(1,307 posts)... yes, I can drive a train.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_train_operation
NBachers
(17,107 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)They do not take the physical sciences classes that true engineers take and do not design or make tangible objects that need to be produced with the physical "laws of nature" in mind. Computer engineers who design electric circuits and cpu architectures are real engineers. The software people do need to understand logic and have good problem solving skills, but this is just a small portion of what engineers have in their toolbox. I understand why they are described as engineers, because it is the closest current job title that fits what they do. I do not think it is an accurate descriptor though.
edit - it does appear that there are many real engineers involved though, I and support the effort.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)... a long time ago we had an anoying electrical engineer at work who was always gripping and complaining about software engineers being called engineers. We started teasing him about his "choo choo train".
Us software engineers don't have any concern about your reservations.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I agree with him. The difference is that most engineers could transition very easily into software development as it is already a subset of their job duties. Software developers could not expand to design real objects without much additional education.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)... have you ever reviewed code written by someone who hasn't studied the art? (Let alone a complex software system.)
And, by the way, anyone can download sketch up and design a chunk of metal - after a fashion.
Sorry, but software engineers don't take metal bending chauvinists serriously.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 10:19 AM - Edit history (1)
There is a major difference. Yes, anyone can draw a chunk of metal. Not anyone can draw a chunk of metal that can survive the forces and cyclical strains or more that will be placed on it over it's life. That is why so many imported products break so fast. They don't engineer the products, they just sketch out their form.
I will give that there are areas of software design that benefit greatly from understanding of higher level mathematics than I have taken, and I have taken graduate level mathematics courses.
What has happened, both in physical engineering and software design, is that industries have worked hard to devalue them. They do not wish to pay someone to do it right, they want to pay someone cheap to just get it out the door. So they have turned things that once were done with strong use of scientific principles into "sketch of a part with this shape" and "write a code to do this action" without regards to the quality of the end result. Moore's law has allowed this to occur more effectively on the software side in consumer products because the hardware is exponentially more efficient and has exponentially more storage capability than a decade or two ago. That does not translate as well into the real objects, where the same laws of physics apply today that did in Newton's time.