Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Nobody is saying that you can't be a programmer, or a dev, you just can't be a software engineer without a certification.



Why, so the software engineer can be a scapegoat if something goes wrong?

Certify the software, not the person.


Stand up for your code and certify it like a mechanical or civil engineer certifies what they make or don’t wear the title of engineer. It’s time to take on all the qualities of the sobriquet not just the status and the salary that was appropriated.


Exactly. It's just a title. I'm perfectly happy being a professional programmer with no certification. Tinder and even most parts of Google don't really need "engineers". Boeing, not so much.


today, the plan is 'certify the process', not the product. people are assumed to be faulty.


Certifying design engineers is the old school dumb way of doing things. The better modern way is to certify the design process and to provide domain specific training to engineers involved.


You're right, you just can't get a job as a programmer. You also can't contribute to many major OSS projects.


Huh? Why can't you? It's the engineer's job at a company that deploys an OSS project to test and certify the tolerances, SLAs, and best practices (usage documents, checklists, etc.) for something they choose to deploy, whether or not that piece of software was written by engineers or plain old non-engineer developers.


In that case you're deferring the certification of all linux kernel engineers onto the guy who ships it. That sounds like a recipe for not using it ever?

I don't think you're considering how everything works together - in mechanical engineering a certified engineer designs her machinery around other tools that themselves were designed by certified engineers, all using manufacturing processes designed by process and industrial design engineers.

What you're claiming is equivalent to a technical engineer designing something based on equipment designed by - for all intents and purposes - a random person on the internet, and you're now responsible for determining all the mechanical qualities of everything yourself.

I think you're dismissing what it means to say "I am a professional engineer and I approve of the use of linux" in such a context. The only rational approach is to only take OSs (or any other part of your software stack) that has itself been written entirely by certified engineers.


That's nonsensical. An engineering project does not require a provenance chain of engineers all the way down with a really low level engineer certifying that every single grain that went into the concrete was hand sorted by herself. At some point you certify something by taking measurements and tolerances and deliver a safe operating range. There's no reason why an operating system or programming language couldn't live below that level.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: