Ask HN: Does it bother you this label is abused? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Does it bother you this label is abused?

2 pointsblindprogrammer6 comments

Why is the term "engineer" used in almost every technical job title these days—prompt engineer, cybersecurity engineer, and even software engineer? Does this bother anyone else?

I always cringe when people call themselves "engineers" outside the three government-licensed fields: mechanical, chemical, and electrical engineering. In my opinion, if you haven’t gone to school, earned a bachelor’s degree, and passed a government licensing exam to obtain the title of engineer, you have no business calling yourself one.

You’re not a "software engineer"; you’re a software developer. If you’re an engineer, then by that logic, a Starbucks barista could call themselves a "coffee doctor."

Titles like "prompt engineer" or "cybersecurity engineer" seem like attempts to sound more important than they really are.

If every technical skill can be labeled as "engineering," the term loses its significance. Perhaps we should reserve the title of "engineer" for those evaluated and licensed by a governing board.

What do you think? I know this might not be a popular opinion here, but I’m curious—maybe someone else feels the same way.

I am not an engineer by training, but rather a linguist. I just got sucked into the software development biz for a while. But as a linguist, I can tell you that the only thing you need to know about words is they change. They generalize or specialize, they become offensive or even complimentary. It’s best to just accept that the popular definition of the word no longer matches how you desire it to be used.

The government doesn't get to dictate what the word "engineer" means. An engineer does engineering. Some software developers carefully design very complex systems. That's engineering.

That said, I am with you, the word is overused. Most developers aren't engineering, they're slapping frameworks together, meeting product deadlines and creating mostly godawful programs. Some of them, very few, do their work with enough rigor and care that they could call what they do engineering.

I had a coworker who's about 20 years older than me who thought he was an "engineer" like the "engineer" of a locomotive. He had the hat to go with it.

I worked in aerospace w actual engineers and though I am thought of as smart, and can certainly ask tough questions, I’ve always avoided the arbitrary use of the word. I’m not sure I am onboard accreditation, but to me an engineer needs to be able to conduct proper analysis of complex issues while understanding and taking into account the various risk issues. So to me it’s always been a cringy term if you do know calculus and can’t manage risk.

i feel the opposite...just passing a licensing exam does not make an engineer, and if you think their better, why are they taking programming jobs instead of "proper engineering" jobs?

I agree with your comment on the licensing exam. But, I do not think any one role is better than another. But if a highly skilled person capable of performing engineering takes a non-engineering job, they are not doing engineering (or are out of scope with the required work). So, for me, it tweaks me a little when people refer to themselves as "engineers". And when I managed federal government system administrators, they were "administrators" and that was a GS-2210 Information Technology Specialist. Not an engineer. And they were really smart, but I had to keep an eye on them or they would start engineering solutions not in line with the chief engineer (who was an engineer) and these rouge solutions were very difficult to unwind from. So, I have always held a special status for true engineers and following an engineering direction. But I also recognize there are many important people working in roles that are not engineering.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com