
Dijkstra: Battle Between Managers / Beancounters & Technologists [pdf] - signa11
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ewd11xx/EWD1165.PDF
======
MarkPNeyer
Maybe i'm out of my league by criticizing this incredibly intelligent man's
arguments, but here goes.

First, Dijkstra argues, "There is no such thing as 'making money': some people
succeed in transferring money out of the pockets of others into their own."
The implication of his argument is that economic activity is zero sum - you
can't create value, you can only take it from someone else. This is patently
false - there is far more wealth in the world now than there was 100 years
ago. If it is impossible to 'make money,' then where did this extra wealth
come from? When I buy a computer from Dell, it's a win-win situation. Dell
gets money from me, and i get a powerful tool which I could use to develop
software, which I could then sell to others for more than the cost of the
computer. The software that I write is wealth that I have created - the world
is better off with the software in it than without the software.

Dijkstra then expresses his animus against banks, saying they become rich by
trying to speculate at someone else's expense. This may be true of investment
banks, but what about a bank that makes loans to new businesses? Exactly whose
expense are the banks profiting from? The business gets ahead because it needs
capital to get off the ground, and the banks get ahead because they earn
interest on money that would otherwise be sitting idle.

I agree with his main argument, that 'software engineering' is a rather
meaningless term, but I disagree with his hateful attitude towards the
industrial world.

~~~
gsk
It seems you misread Dijkstra. He uses 'making money' within the context of
financial 'industry' and questions the legitimacy of that 'industry' which
does not produce any goods, thereby pointing out one of the many euphemisms
adopted by financial sector to swindle people out of money. (Of course, one
can legitimately disagree here and say that moving money where it is most
useful is a useful thing to do and that's one of the good things financial
sector does). Between, this essay did not seem to me at all to indicate a
hateful attitude towards the industrial world.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
HTML, and hence searchable:
[http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD11xx/EW...](http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD11xx/EWD1165.html)

~~~
aerique
Thanks, although I'm glad the OP linked the PDF since EWD has a really nice
hand-writing and I would have missed that otherwise.

That said, a pretty timeless piece if somewhat black-and-white.

------
hristov
I love re-reading this. BTW I always wondered about that PL/I ad and I finally
found it! It is somewhere in this PDF:

<http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~nathanen/files/cbi-gender.pdf>

It is hilarious. PL/I must be incredibly easy if this cute blonde can handle
it!

~~~
Deestan
The ads on the last two pages were breathtakingly horrible. It is hard to
imagine how that sort of advertising could ever have been legal.

~~~
eugenejen
that was the world before 1970. Law is just a set of Boolean functions of the
society that defines the law.

It was illegal in 1860 to have a half black half white president in U.S.

~~~
anamax
> It was illegal in 1860 to have a half black half white president in U.S.

No, it wasn't. Disagree? Point to the relevant part of the US constitution.
(The 3/5ths clause isn't on point, and before you point to it, ask yourself
who benefits from a higher number and who benefits from a lower number. Hint -
slave states wanted a higher number....)

There were free blacks in the US from before the revolution. The males were
eligible to vote and hold office.

------
telemachos
>> _The mediocre mistrust the exceptional man because they don’t understand
him, and they fear him because he can do things beyond their comprehension. As
far as human memory is concerned, this circumstance has led to bloody
conflicts — Christ was neither the first nor the last excentric to be
crucified._

Someone read far too much Nietzsche that week.

~~~
Confusion
You cannot possibly read too much Nietzsche :). However, you can take it too
serious or too literal.

------
mpakes
Fascinating take on things from the perspective of academia. I've always held
the same distrust of the term 'Software Engineer,' given that software
development is rarely as rigorous and disciplined as actual 'Engineering.'

I love Dijkstra's writings (and his penmanship, for that matter). I also
quietly enjoy that most of them end by referencing my alma mater. Hook 'em
Horns. :-)

