from the is-there-a-programmers-code-of-ethics dept.
An engineer points out that the engineering professions have codes of ethics that guide them in designing for safety and in communicating with the public, and that these are not being followed by some programmers: "It seems to me that as a nanomechanical engineer (or rather a mechanical engineer with an interest in nanomechanics), I was permanently "conditioned" to always think of the ethics behind a design by "upping the safety factor" on my design. If your daily dealing with deadly machines — or rather machines that can cause harm to the public — then as an engineer I am obligated to design something that has a higher safety factor than someone who designs air conditioning systems. This fact, or rather a standard rule of engineering practice, has been overlooked by Joy and his counterparts…My point is this, that as a general rule engineers create highly reliable systems that must have a certain safety factor included whenever there is the slightest chance of harm to the public. I, or rather we, as engineers (Civil, mechanical, (High power) Electrical), are always worried about the safety factors we have set on a design…I think I might be over simplifying the issue but ultimately I have a hard time understanding why so many programmers are a) claiming to have a solid understanding of safety factors when their job has only a few instances for life or death of the public and b), if they follow the same code of ethics set forth by the state governmental systems, why is it they are not lumped together with the rest of the classically trained engineers? One other thing, if they are, then didn't they see that part in the ethics section about slandering or speaking out to the public on something in which they have no educated knowledge?… I would love to hear what the software "engineers" have to say about this particular essay in order for me to learn more about their trade." Read More for the full post. I don't understand how so many programmers are speaking out for engineerís sake. Bill Joy, a programmer/ electrical engineer is speaking on a subject of which he has little interest.
It seems to me that as a nanomechanical engineer (or rather a mechanical engineer with an interest in nanomechanics), I was permanently "conditioned" to always think of the ethics behind a design by "upping the safety factor" on my design. If your daily dealing with deadly machines — or rather machines that can cause harm to the public — then as an engineer I am obligated to design something that has a higher safety factor than someone who designs air conditioning systems. This fact, or rather a standard rule of engineering practice, has been overlooked by Joy and his counterparts because last time I looked I was not (nor was anyone else) killed the last time Windows crashed.
My point is this, that as a general rule engineers create highly reliable systems that must have a certain safety factor included whenever there is the slightest chance of harm to the public. I, or rather we, as engineers (Civil, mechanical, (High power) Electrical), are always worried about the safety factors we have set on a design. This is not to mention that people who make toys, medical equipment, and other devices have had a serious background in failure theory and have been warned about the entire safety factor area.
I think I might be over simplifying the issue but ultimately I have a hard time understanding why so many programmers are a) claiming to have a solid understanding of safety factors when their job has only a few instances for life or death of the public and b), if they follow the same code of ethics set forth by the state governmental systems, why is it they are not lumped together with the rest of the classically trained engineers?
One other thing, if they are, then didn't they see that part in the ethics section about slandering or speaking out to the public on something in which they have no educated knowledge? The system is there for a reason. It works. I do believe that it, the system, is changing but I don't believe that all of the work done in the past has been in vain. I personally have read a decent amount of engineering philosophy (including Henry Petroski's "To Engineer is Human") and I for one believe that a classically trained engineer is not out to destroy himself/herself or the society that he/she works for. I would love to hear what the software "engineers" have to say about this particular essay in order for me to learn more about their trade.
"I am Engineer, Scientist, Mathematician, Exacting Artist. I don't care what you label me I am still Me." – Anonymous
