ultimately about critical thought and solving problems/achieving functionality with limited resources
I find in software engineering that the resources tend to be ample, it’s the capacity for critical thought that’s constrained. Predicting the users, predicting the future, predicting what users will do and want to do in the future… get that right and you’ve got the requirements for good software. Without good requirements, your software can build all kinds of fancy bridges to nowhere.
At one point, about 10 years after graduating with my Masters’ in Computer Engineering, I looked around about getting a PE license and the reality was: it had (and still has as far as I can tell) no value in the software field. I have a BS in EE, and if I wanted to start signing drawings for building electrical systems, a PE is just the thing for that. Around here, you need to apprentice under a PE for a time to get them to certify you as a PE, and the PEs we have aren’t in software, they wouldn’t know how to evaluate your software skills or professionalism. Reminds me of high school where they recognized that about 6 of the students knew far more about computer programming than the best (and only) teacher we had for it, so we were put in an “independent study” class to learn what we could from the equipment that various local businesses had donated to the school. Even as a practicing EE in the biomedical device design field, there was really no value to the PE license - for similar cultural reasons: the best biomedical engineers are in a different world from our existing PEs.
you will also be held accountable if something goes wrong.
I graduated before the internet. I had researched local companies the old fashioned way, and the first one I drove to to ask about a job, when I got there the parking lot was empty and there was a padlock and chain on the door. Guess I need to go to #2 on the list… turns out they (a pacemaker company) had been reprocessing faulty devices and shipping them with inadequate testing after rework, leading to the devices going bad shortly after surgical implant, requiring additional surgery for replacement. A whole chain of technicians, engineers, and executive management were culpable for the expense and risk they were causing for the users of their pacemakers. Other than the FDA shutting them down, there was a bunch of blow-hard talk about accountability, fines and jail time for management, but neither even came to a court hearing. Our system is, frankly, still very wild-west in terms of accountability for engineers in emerging fields.
it’s critical that we decide how software engineers play a role in preventing those things and how we hold them accountable when they don’t.
Agreed, but software has already had life-safety-critical and massively financially impactful roles in society for 50+ years now, and I see precious little progress toward formal accountability.
You clearly have a lot more experience than me- I’m fairly fresh out the gate. Like you, though, I work in a field where licensure isn’t super relevant (manufacturing).
It was drilled into my head in school and by my dad (cheme but does civil work and is on the committee that writes the cheme PE) that that for some domains, like civil and chem, it’s nigh impossible to find work without a PE (even entry level often requires at least the EIT accreditation).
Our system is, frankly, still very wild-west in terms of accountability for engineers in emerging fields.
It’s deeply unfortunate that your experience with the accountability side of things went the way it did. That’s another thing that they drilled into my head at school- if you sign a drawing and that park killed or hurt someone, the victims could call on you in a court of law to explain or even include you as a defendant in the suit. Does that always happen? Obviously not, but at least the possibly is there I guess.
Agreed, but software has already had life-safety-critical and massively financially impactful roles in society for 50+ years now, and I see precious little progress toward formal accountability.
Fully agreed here, I was just struggling to think of older life-critical examples after travelling for 22 hours lol (long day yesterday).
I find in software engineering that the resources tend to be ample, it’s the capacity for critical thought that’s constrained. Predicting the users, predicting the future, predicting what users will do and want to do in the future… get that right and you’ve got the requirements for good software. Without good requirements, your software can build all kinds of fancy bridges to nowhere.
At one point, about 10 years after graduating with my Masters’ in Computer Engineering, I looked around about getting a PE license and the reality was: it had (and still has as far as I can tell) no value in the software field. I have a BS in EE, and if I wanted to start signing drawings for building electrical systems, a PE is just the thing for that. Around here, you need to apprentice under a PE for a time to get them to certify you as a PE, and the PEs we have aren’t in software, they wouldn’t know how to evaluate your software skills or professionalism. Reminds me of high school where they recognized that about 6 of the students knew far more about computer programming than the best (and only) teacher we had for it, so we were put in an “independent study” class to learn what we could from the equipment that various local businesses had donated to the school. Even as a practicing EE in the biomedical device design field, there was really no value to the PE license - for similar cultural reasons: the best biomedical engineers are in a different world from our existing PEs.
I graduated before the internet. I had researched local companies the old fashioned way, and the first one I drove to to ask about a job, when I got there the parking lot was empty and there was a padlock and chain on the door. Guess I need to go to #2 on the list… turns out they (a pacemaker company) had been reprocessing faulty devices and shipping them with inadequate testing after rework, leading to the devices going bad shortly after surgical implant, requiring additional surgery for replacement. A whole chain of technicians, engineers, and executive management were culpable for the expense and risk they were causing for the users of their pacemakers. Other than the FDA shutting them down, there was a bunch of blow-hard talk about accountability, fines and jail time for management, but neither even came to a court hearing. Our system is, frankly, still very wild-west in terms of accountability for engineers in emerging fields.
Agreed, but software has already had life-safety-critical and massively financially impactful roles in society for 50+ years now, and I see precious little progress toward formal accountability.
You clearly have a lot more experience than me- I’m fairly fresh out the gate. Like you, though, I work in a field where licensure isn’t super relevant (manufacturing).
It was drilled into my head in school and by my dad (cheme but does civil work and is on the committee that writes the cheme PE) that that for some domains, like civil and chem, it’s nigh impossible to find work without a PE (even entry level often requires at least the EIT accreditation).
It’s deeply unfortunate that your experience with the accountability side of things went the way it did. That’s another thing that they drilled into my head at school- if you sign a drawing and that park killed or hurt someone, the victims could call on you in a court of law to explain or even include you as a defendant in the suit. Does that always happen? Obviously not, but at least the possibly is there I guess.
Fully agreed here, I was just struggling to think of older life-critical examples after travelling for 22 hours lol (long day yesterday).