Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday March 02 2014, @11:59PM   Printer-friendly
from the was-it-much-harder-in-my-day? dept.

shabadoo writes:

"Will software engineering always be a cowboy's game? Or is it just a case of when you're a passionate expert the pimples stand out more clearly. This guy has clearly had enough. His vents are amusing, but also raise some good points about the state of the industry."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by regift_of_the_gods on Monday March 03 2014, @01:55AM

    by regift_of_the_gods (138) on Monday March 03 2014, @01:55AM (#9865)

    to the personnel advice from the VC [soylentnews.org] we saw here last week.

    IMO both POVs are valid, but neither should be taken as absolute. There IS a correlation between math skills and coding/architectural skills, but other qualities are important as well. Sometimes even more important.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by neagix on Monday March 03 2014, @07:04AM

    by neagix (25) on Monday March 03 2014, @07:04AM (#9930)
    I mentioned once the Squeeze theorem [wikipedia.org] to explain the choice of an algorithm over another, I discovered that none of my colleagues knew about it, nor understood it (also CS graduates) - and more importantly didn't think there was any added value in choosing an algorithm based on a mathematically proven theorem.
    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by lgsoynews on Monday March 03 2014, @11:00AM

      by lgsoynews (1235) on Monday March 03 2014, @11:00AM (#9975)

      You mention one of the big problems I've encountered among my colleagues. Something that drives me nuts.

      People have some knowledge, usually learnt at the university where they worked hard to beat it into submission. But once they start working, it's as if they never learned anything more advanced than a loop and -maybe- using debug "print" message, 70's-like.

      Why?

      I mean these people have learned many things about algorithms, data structures, but never even TRY to use them.

      And I'm not talking about the most esoterical knowledge either, nothing mathematical, I'm not talking about AI, proofs, or even DSL. No, really, I mean for instance using finite automata. The concept and usage of a simple automata is easy, but they'll never think about using it, even when using it should be the obvious choice...

      And don't get me started about the 5+ years graduates who don't even know about hash-lists! How is that possible? I'm not talking about writing one -it can be quite difficult- but just using them from a library or the language itself. Hash-lists are among the most classical data structures: they are easy to understand and useful for so many problems. Astonishingly, many colleagues and candidates I've met didn't seemed to know about them or even have heard of them. It's maddening.

      How can you solve problems when you are either ignorant of the most simple -well known- solutions, or reluctant to use them when you know they exist?

      Then of course, to top it off, you have the bosses that actively discourage the use of any such "advanced" concepts, because thinking before-hand is bad, architecture is useless, what tests? Let's start coding NOW. But that's another topic...

      • (Score: 1) by Grishnakh on Monday March 03 2014, @04:39PM

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 03 2014, @04:39PM (#10105)

        You mention one of the big problems I've encountered among my colleagues. Something that drives me nuts.

        How can you solve problems when you are either ignorant of the most simple -well known- solutions, or reluctant to use them when you know they exist?

        Then of course, to top it off, you have the bosses that actively discourage the use of any such "advanced" concepts, because thinking before-hand is bad, architecture is useless, what tests? Let's start coding NOW.

        It sounds to me like your colleagues are more competent at their jobs than you are. They're doing things the way the bosses want, and you're just trying to swim upstream and cause problems.

        • (Score: 1) by neagix on Monday March 03 2014, @08:27PM

          by neagix (25) on Monday March 03 2014, @08:27PM (#10214)

          It sounds to me like your colleagues are more competent at their jobs than you are. They're doing things the way the bosses want, and you're just trying to swim upstream and cause problems.

          Except that if you work in IT, you never stop learning - you just cannot afford it. The moment you do, prepare to be replaced.
          So if you find an attitude that halts or hinders your personal development it IS advised to swim upstream or change job. The opposite of "causing problems" is not "squeeze me as much as you want with any nonsensical braindead idea you have". On one hand you have to keep your brain cursor on useful technologies for the company, on the other hand you have to reject incredibly broken designs. It's a pure call to honesty IMHO.

          Anyway, I think lgsoynews was referring to the level "culture" in the work place while I am more interested in why/when did we forget that the "S" in CS stands for "Science". Or it used to.

          • (Score: 1) by Grishnakh on Monday March 03 2014, @09:10PM

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 03 2014, @09:10PM (#10235)

            On one hand you have to keep your brain cursor on useful technologies for the company, on the other hand you have to reject incredibly broken designs.

            And what if that goes directly against what your boss wants? You seem to be assuming that companies are well-run and managers are intelligent and knowledgeable. When you're an employee, your job is to your boss's bidding. If he wants you to implement a nonsensical braindead idea, that's what you do.

            So if you find an attitude that halts or hinders your personal development it IS advised to swim upstream or change job.

            You can only do this so much. If you jump around too much, you're seen as a liability. Plus, this isn't very good for your financial state.

            • (Score: 1) by neagix on Monday March 03 2014, @09:45PM

              by neagix (25) on Monday March 03 2014, @09:45PM (#10256)

              I am not assuming that utopian world you described, but saying that it is worth your sanity to look for a middle ground.

              Regarding the "if you jump around too much" point: what if some people are fine with bending and others are not? Sorry but I am not buying the scaremonger "wisdom". I will simply work for those companies that do not see me as a liability but as a resource, problem solved.

            • (Score: 1) by cafebabe on Tuesday March 04 2014, @07:26PM

              by cafebabe (894) on Tuesday March 04 2014, @07:26PM (#10891) Journal

              When you're an employee, your job is to your boss's bidding. If he wants you to implement a nonsensical braindead idea, that's what you do.

              Your job as an employee is to maximize shareholder value. If you're out of a job, your colleagues are out of a job and your boss is out of a job, that's because shareholder value is zero and no-one done their job properly.

              I'll admit that it can be very difficult to say "Your idea blows goats" in a manner which is diplomatic but you're dis-honorable to ignore it and you make the computer industry look amateur.

              --
              1702845791×2
              • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday March 04 2014, @08:07PM

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday March 04 2014, @08:07PM (#10916)

                Then by that definition, every industry is "amateur". I don't know of any industry where you can tell your boss he's an idiot and his idea is stupid and expect to keep your job for long. Yes, you can be more diplomatic, but after you've made your case, his word is sovereign, so when he tells you to implement the nonsensical braindead idea, that's your job. You can go over his head to his boss, but that's a sure recipe for disaster.