|
I think /. (slashdot.org) is exactly where the nerds OP is talking about all hang out. Pick a political article and all the libertarian voices will be (+5 Informative).
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
Programming might some day be as useful as social skills, psychological skills or organizational skills. Only time will tell, but I'm optimistic.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Undergrad in anything that isn't actually math/hard science seems like it never goes beyond calc 1, if that - even if it's relevant. I got a degree in finance from one of the top ranked undergraduate finance programs in the country, and I had courses in risk and loving futures/options that didn't contain any calculus. I'm assuming you know how unbelievably ridiculous this is. What made it especially dumb is that one semester of calculus was actually required, so the students should have, in theory at least, known some calculus. I think that it was at least partially due to grade inflation (which seems to be a big issue at all "elite" schools) and pressure on professors to not issue bad grades/fail students. I'm pretty sure most of the top ranked kids in my class would have seen their GPAs drop if the higher level finance courses actually contained more math/statistics, but this could have interfered with them acquiring high paying jobs and donating millions of dollars to the university. Calculus != Statistics
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
^ You love saying that every chance you get, with absolutely no proof or evidence. Why do you have this persecution complex? Solkanar512 posted:Why are you hopeful that programming skills will become as necessary to basic living as the ability to communicate effectively with other human beings? Why do you think society would be improved by forcing everyone to learn how to program as a requirement for living a normal life? Are you hoping to see non-programmers cast out on to the street like the mentally ill? No, what I'm saying is if you believe the people in this thread then someday ubiquitous computing will happen. Until the day that computers are literally everywhere (which does sound sweet to me) programming will still not be as valuable as social, psychology or organizational skills. Even then I doubt it would be more valuable.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
FamDav posted:okay cool then we (software devs) will just do what they did Justine is that you? BrandorKP posted:Just answered the thread title question there.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
demonicon posted:Are you talking about software engineering or coding? Because while the latter actually is as simple as carpentry (as others have said you can learn coding in very short time )software engineering actually is an engineering profession. Coding is just the mechanical part of realising what you engineered. Same as an electronics engineer whose work is the design of a chip and not the manufacturing of it. Software engineering is broadly used in the United States as a term. Some people are Professional Software Engineers that might be licensed the same way a Professional Civil Engineer is. Most "software engineers" are not licensed in the same way other engineering professions. But then again, I'm pretty sure this crowd might argue that writing formal logical proofs is "coding" 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
demonicon posted:Oh I see. In Germany you need to have a master or diploma in computer science to be able to call yourself an engineer. But there are also a lot of people here who basically work as an engineer with only on the job education. Some of them are as good a or better as the guys with their master but many are also really bad. I honestly think both of these are more artifacts of our time. We have yet to fully flesh out the differences between "software engineering" and coding, but we will over time. It makes perfect sense to have a "Professional Software Engineer" stamp the code that runs your autonomous car like a "Professional Mechanical Engineer" stamped the car's blueprints. Likewise, the value of coding is disproportionally high right now. We have powerful computers and awful interfaces. Coding gives you access to those powerful tools because there is no other way to do it right now. As our interfaces improve, the value of coding decreases. You can see this ripple across fields as computing tools advance in that field. It used to be that graphics drawing was done entirely by code. Now we have photoshop and I can do some crazy cool (batch) stuff with imagemagick but the relative value versus photoshop for the vast majority of use cases of graphics drawing is low. Things aren't going to stay the same, software and computers are changing too fast to pretend that the jobs associated with them won't shift too. We do a lot of calculations on a daily basis, but we don't need human calculators anymore. Why assume we'll always need human programmers?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Typo posted:In my school at least the Software Engineering program was a certified one (meaning you could get a professional engineer designation if you wanted to). If you're in the US that's exactly the misconception we are discussion. In the US engineers are licensed. That means the State actually controls the testing and confers legal rights and responsibilities like being admitted to the Bar or getting a medical license. Few states have actually implemented the new PE Software program (mainly because of tech companies complaining). A student with a MS Mechanical Engineering cannot call themselves a "Professional Mechanical Engineer" without a license that requires multiple tests and basically apprenticeship. There is not an equivalency in the US for "Professional Software Engineer" in most states.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Pretty sure I didn't say it was? I only put the "/statistics" because advanced statistics is also very important (particularly towards risk management, which is one of the "higher level" courses I mentioned). I never had to do any sort of statistical programming in my finance/information systems double major. The person you were replying to was talking primarily about statistics, that's all. Statistics get taught a lot more than calculus in the "soft" fields.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Summit posted:Right, for me it doesn't make sense. If some developers in some other company thought they were being treated unfairly I have no issue with them unionizing. If someone came up to me today and wanted me to join a union where I currently work I wouldn't support it because I don't see how it could possibly benefit me. This hardly makes me anti-union. I'm very pro-union in the right circumstances. In other words, not every job requires collective bargaining IMO. No, that's actually anti-union sorry. You don't want your workplace unionized because "gently caress you, got mine". asdf32 posted:You're unironically posting elements of an elementary school "you can be anything you want" lecture. This isn't how the world works and I really question why you think you can be trained in just anything. Sports, art, writing, science, engineering, math? I can't. Dude, I'm really sorry you think you can't learn how to sports, art, write, science, engineering or math. We're not saying anyone will be the top 10% of programmers, but that programming is a skill that like most skills is learnable by most people. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 04:14 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Summit posted:When you say workplace do you mean every employee? I don't think developers in my workplace would benefit from a union. If other types of staff wanted to unionize I would support that though. Right, you don't want your shop (developers) unionized because you don't see how it will benefit you. That's not pro-union no matter how you slice it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:What if you support everyone's right to unionize but vote against it for your shop? Is that pro or anti-union? I don't see how that can be pro-union unless you have a beef with a particular local or something else specific to the election. enraged_camel posted:Did you just compare software engineers to chiropractors in terms of legitness? Dude you always spout this non-sense. Where does this rage come from? Edit: specifically I mean this insane "D&D hates software developers -> because of class warfare" bullshit. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 04:25
|
|
"
|
Xae posted:There have been a number of threads lately that have all but declared "Techies" or Software Developers to be Class Enemy #1. Every now and then someone makes a salient point, but a lot of the posting reeks of petty jealousy. That's one, rather self-important way to read those threads. Alternatively, they could be critiques of a large and increasingly powerful segment of society that is increasingly arguing for anti-societal actions under the guise of "innovation". I mean between the owners of these titan of industries calling themselves best pals with Rand Paul, their employees arguing for slavery, and their business models increasingly based on leveraging public goods for private profit while leaving individuals on the hook for all liabilities it is hard for me to see how this is just jealousy. Especially when we have self-proclaimed software developers claiming they want to institute the same structures that bankers did to maintain control and power.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:All the same, when San Francisco tech billionaires decide to throw their money at Congress- and their hesitancy to do so is going to subside sooner rather than later- I get the feeling that a few years down the line, we'll be wistful for the days when Wall Street ruled Capitol Hill. At least bankers know that they're assholes- not only do techies deny that simple fact, but they also hide it in patronizing "we're making the world a better place (at the expense of the public sphere)" bullshit. They already are, FWD.US is just the beginning.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Typo posted:Oh good, here comes the rabid leftist ideological purity portion of DnD threads. What? No one is saying you have to be pro-union. Just literally denying the fundamental premise of union solidarity while pretending to be pro-union is a little hypocritical. Don't take it so personally.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
quote:The people posting don't actually give a poo poo about such petty things as details of unionizing the software sector, or whether it's actually appropriate. No, you keep saying that you support unions but not in software because of ~reasons~. You haven't actually ever listed any for us to discuss. The fact you rely on "well, I can't see how a union would help me" is not exactly indicative of someone with pro-union beliefs. Seriously, do some reading on "union solidarity" and you'll see why that attitude is a classic anti-union trope. Typo posted:This is pretty much exactly what I mean. Straight up throwing out insults and then telling them not to take it personally it just....either really tone deaf or demonstrate a complete lack of social skills. Are you seriously that upset I called you "a little hypocritical"? I hope that is not enough to silence your voice.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
I think math would be better if it had more randomized blind trials in forming proofs. I'm thinking you'd have to go all in to do it right. Hoods, some sort of maze, a wall to climb over. Probably something involving fire or hot coals.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:Why do you believe that math is purely deductive reasoning? Hint: an undergrad degree in mathematics is typically offered as both a BA or a BS. Right? Next people will be claiming math is a liberal art!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
FamDav posted:the difference is that (much like hovercraft dude actually) im explaining terminology within an industry to people that are not (obviously) knowledgable about that industry. I program as part of my job, but my job is not (at all) purely programming. That seems lost on a lot of people in this thread. But people who claim to know a lot about "software development" are arguing that "everyone should learn programming or miss out on the future" so that might be the reason people are focused on programming.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:I'm sure the thread has touched on it, but without robust licensing and certification, unionization would be impossible. Not to mention I consider myself perfectly capable of negotiating my own benefits and compensation based on my needs. What do you think makes software programming different from the myriad professional and technical fields that are unionized?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
Gantolandon posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_mathematics Experimentation != scientific method. Notice the wiki article you linked doesn't call experimental math science, which is the whole point. When I try dipping chocolate into queso isn't not science just tasty.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Why do I need a union so that I can write software? I don't understand what it would bring to me. If I was building bridges, treating people's medical conditions, representing them in a legal matter, or even fixing their electrical poo poo, I could understand why the public would benefit from a union or professional certification. All I do is sit at a desk and think for a few hours before writing code to help people do their jobs. Believe it or not I am pro-union, but it does not make sense to me why I should join one or where the benefit to me and my career would be. Well a union would have likely prevented the illegal cartel to depress wages in Silicon Valley. Also a union provides protections against management acting unfairly or illegaly and can fight for better wages and benefits. No what were the reasons Unions wouldn't work again?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:California's labor laws should prevent this. Though I am not sure agreeing to pay developers at prestigious firms 'x' is illegal. Otherwise companies agreeing not to poach talent (even outside of Silicon Valley and software this happens) would be illegal. But I know from first-hand experience that it happens. Ok so you're just making strawman attacks against unions without actually being able to claim something particular about software development that makes it impossible to unionize as you originally claimed. Yet you claim to be pro-union, got it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:You're going to have to explain the benefits and implementation of unionization for me to get on board in this instance. Solidarity with fast food works, I understand. As an industry insider, I simply cannot see how it would work nation and industry-wide. I've explained to you the basics of why unionization benefits workers. You replied with some trope about how unions make hiring new workers impossible. Unions come in many forms and likely whatever stereotype of unions you have in your head isn't the way that a professional union works. We have union programmers, union designers, union technicians and union engineers. What about software programming makes it different? As an industry insider, I simply cannot see a reason unions for software developers couldn't work in the United States. Obviously won't happen because of anti-union sentiment but there's nothing special about software that makes it different than other workplaces.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Your basics of union benfits were things that should be preventable with a robust and enforced labor laws. Like I said, I don't even know if wage fixing is illegal, it is certainly lovely, but unsure if it is illegal here in the United States. It's almost like things that work in some countries or parts of the world, don't work in others. Your ignoring half of what I said (the parts about the union getting you a better deal) but yes, if we had perfect labor laws and perfect enforcement we wouldn't have as much need for unions. So you admit there's nothing special about software development that makes it impossible to unionize, but instead you just think it shouldn't be unionized?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:I couldn't imagine going on strike because developers at Facebook are upset they didn't get free dinners in their new corporate headquarters. Just like I wouldn't expect them to go on strike because I didn't get 100% of my target bonus in bum gently caress Oklahoma due to the corporation not meeting goals. Holy poo poo you don't know how unions work.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Best Friends posted:Strikes are just one thing unions can do, having expensive law firms on file and having politicians care about your issues is another. But yeah like you demonstrate this isn't likely to occur because most of labor thinks they're coming out ahead getting paid a job and a half for doing two jobs worth of labor. Score! Also, when the UAW strikes at GM they don't strike at Ford too. Besides strikes are approved by locals anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Typo posted:I think we should have a DnD struggle session thread to root out the false leftists I'm pretty sure lowtax shut that down due to the Secret Service.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Not being a fan of organized labor for a skill that does not make sense to have organized labor does not kick me out of the leftist club. Jesus Christ. You actually still have failed to explain why you think software programming as a skill is different than all the other skills. Instead you just bring up anti-union tropes that are often flatly wrong. But keep pretending you're pro-labor.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:You have yet to show me how a union would benefit let alone be implemented for the millions of developers at the tens of thousands of companies that hire developers. You are claiming to be pro-union but claim software is somehow different. What makes software development different? Unionized workers are used in other industries with lots of employers. Remember, you were wrong about how strikes work so maybe you need to read a little more about unions before you claim they couldn't work in software development. on the left posted:To sell unions to programmers, you need to appeal to the right sensibilities of programmers. Unions would definitely benefit programmers: A programmer's union would also likely be the strongest voice against software patents and other stupid patent policy that only benefits large businesses.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Heaven forbid we implement a policy that affects millions of people's livelihoods in a sensible manner and not just to tick a check box, amirite? So what other skills shouldn't be unionized?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:If the employees and trades people want to unionize, who am I to stop them? Also, what comparable skills do you have in mind that are unionized in America? So you can't come up with any other special snowflake skills besides your own? I've listed several examples since you've refused to actually ever specify what about software development makes unions impossible, but we have designers that are union, engineers that are union, programmers that are union and technicians that are union. So please tell me what about software development makes unions impossible?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:It takes a certain temerity to accuse others of being faux leftists for not being in a union considering that posters like SedanChair work in exploitative for profits themselves and aren't part of a union either. No one is saying someone isn't a leftist for not being in a union. But nice strawman.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Who the gently caress cares who is a leftist or not? Certainly not me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Leftists who are pro-union. Glad to see you finally admit you are not pro-union. Edit: Haha...nice edit
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
CCrew posted:Are you in a union? I'd still love to get input on my union questions from last page. For instance, should all employees unionize including CEOs and management? That's of course a red haring because management cannot be unionized as it is illegal in the US to do so. It also fundamentally ignores the purpose of unions which is to counteract the coercive power of employers and management, something management doesn't need help doing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Summit posted:More than a few people in this thread are really gleeful about a possible crash in developer salaries. It's pretty sad. We should have a thread in 10 years where we repost all these stupid theories about how India and vocational schools put us out of work. It'll be a good laugh. People are only gleeful because of how smugly people are saying that "if you don't learn how to program you're missing out on the future".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
I know of at least one major Silicon Valley company (one that actually works with silicon, not software) that has a US team and a Chinese team that trade off work in 12 hour cycles. So you work all day on a design and when you wake up China has done their day's work on the same design. It can be frustrating for some people from what I understand.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
CCrew posted:How would you imagine setting up those certifications? Microsoft has a set of certifications for .NET now, but the biggest complaint I hear is it's too generalized. You could have certs set up on language syntax, but that doesn't mean you have problem solving ability. You could set up questions on specific algorithms or design practices, but the techniques you use will vary based on the problem you have to solve, and those techniques can change with technology from year to year. Companies currently have varying levels of design practice that would also need to be unified to make a generalized test applicable. The person you were quoting was talking about licensing not certification, which is a big difference. Licenses are issued by the government while certifications are issued by a 3rd party. Also, there already is the test you're asking about, people have linked it several times in this thread. Its mainly about the fundamentals of CS and critical concepts like that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
Zachack posted:This has not been my experience at either side of the table and since the FE basically passes on a C- grade (roughly 70% although I think it shifts) it's not like it means much besides "this person is not a retard", and that should be covered by transcripts/GPA/school accreditation. This probably depends a lot on the field, because I imagine if you're in a field where the only sensible progression is to PE you might look at applicants without the FE as clearly not dedicated to the task. But if you're somewhere where academia, management or other pursuits are options too the FE might not be such a litmus test for dedication.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2014 19:18
|
|