I would have properly applied for every job that appeared in the country over that time.
Surprisingly a lot of people enter the field laterally, not everyone goes through the investment banking angle.
When you go to a doctor, you expect that they completed training and are certified to practice medicine. It is the same for the engineering profession. Would you want to work in a high rise building that was designed and built some self-titled engineers who have never been appropriately trained?
In some countries it is that way. I know Canada is very strict about who can be called an engineer.
In the US, it is not that way. AFAIK, there's no legal definition of an engineer, and anybody can call themselves an engineer.
But that's only for actual Engineering disciplines. We in software don't need to take an "Engineer" test for the same reason we don't need to take a "Rock Star" test or "Ninja" test. We use the title as a courtesy, not an indication of qualification.
Why would some national laws about certifications prevent you from referring to such a person as an engineer?
I left for software before sitting the PE, so they'd read the same were I to return to doing Mechanical Engineering work.
But of course it's silly to stand on principal on such things, so I've never taken offense to anybody calling themselves whatever they like. If the janitor can be an engineer, certainly anybody else can too.
I imagine Architects feel the same way. And Cardiologists will as well, when we start appropriating their title.
The PE thing really only applies to stuff like civil engineering projects.
I believe you that this is the requirement for some fields of engineering. However, there are thousands of people reading HN with the job title 'software engineer' who did not take those exams.
There is such thing as a traineeship. Yes, they lose out on a lot of the concepts and focused study, but I'd take sharp trainee over a hand pressed graduate any day.
It is needed in some cases, you want people to be properly educated, but that's only when the tuition is necessary for that education.
Engineering (software) probably doesn't for the most part, and I think most people resent the hoops they have to jump through because a university wants to stay relevant, hence the down votes.
Software engineering is incredibly high in demand, there are countless free resources and courses available online, and there are a lot of people out there with the capacity to teach themselves. Software engineering is probably the single most enabling thing one could teach themselves in today's world.
There are people who learned how to code, tossed an app in the App Store and made millions. Or someone who started a wordpress blog, dabbled in some customization and discovered a passion for writing code that they never knew existed. It's like teaching yourself how to read, it enables you to learn and understand more.
It's probably one of the few professions where Malcolm Gladwell's contentious principle holds true. Do it religiously for 5-6 years and absorb everything you learn like a sponge, and you are probably more of an expert in your field than someone graduating from a University because you're on the cutting edge whereas they're just figuring out where they fit into the picture.
Tangentially, presumably for the same reasons, both genders were evenly represented.