Engineering isn't about working on the most interesting problems. It's about getting stuff done and management happy.
Here, parent explained in detail how to get stuff done, management very happy and secure their position for years to come.
Here, parent explained in detail how to get stuff done, management very happy and secure their position for years to come.
Truth is harsh, however this seems to be 100% accurate for nearly all cases of employment. Rarely do you get to focus on simply interesting problems and good engineering as a primary concern
What a strange thing to say! Aren't people also kind of... things? Shouldn't they be at least as interesting as things?
>One needs to be able to create their own interesting solutions rather than expecting them to be handed down on a plate.
You should tell that to every old manager I had.
They sound like boreful people. If you find you have become boreful, there's a good chance you may be experiencing burnout or depression, which are nasty diseases, but still ones that afflict the subject, not the object. Nothing is boring but for the person who perceives it that way.
They have a job and family at the end of the day too. Not everyone has the power nor passion to try and and move a billion dollar corporation to care for people over profit.
>If you find you have become boreful, there's a good chance you may be experiencing burnout or depression,
I haven't has a full time job in over 18 months, so I hope I'm not burnt out.
>Nothing is boring but for the person who perceives it that way.
That's like saying nothing is ugly except for what people think is ugly. Boredom is personal and shaped by each person's experience, so I don't think framing it as a person for not trying hard enough is going to go too far in practice (nor is it productive to judge people based on how they prioritize their lives). Of course some things will be boring to one person and a life passion for another.We don't have enough time nor energy to try and find appreciation for every object and concept on Earth.
word of warning from an old guy, don't create problems for yourself when you don't have to. Turning something boring into something interesting can have painful consequences down the road.
Fixing stuff on a legacy product may make management happy but if that product is discontinued next year then you haven't accrued technical expertise valuable to the company (but you may have built a reputation as a fixer and quick learner).
So, as usual, it is a balancing act.
Edit: this is my perspective from the embedded world. It probably applies generally, though.
When times get tight the new projects get shitcanned and the 10 year-old cash cow design gets the promised new features.
One crusty project I worked on was a legacy control board for a piece of restaurant equipment. The customer, the company that built the actual machine, had been building this product for 40 years. It had been through two PCB redesigns and two different microcontrollers, but the logic was tried and true and had to survive. A port of the project from 6800 assembly to C had completely gone off the rails and the contractor was dumped. All it took was a 20-opcode fix to a routine that the contractor just couldn't grok.
If any the conclusion is: work on what you want, life is short.
The split there isn’t in favor of doing stuff that’s fun and novel though; actually, the engineer should usually pick a boring proven solution if the public has a high stake in the outcome.
But the vast majority of HN topics are not concerned. Additionaly, it does not pay well
That's a perfectly reasonable thing to want out of engineering for yourself. I wouldn't state it as an absolute truth for all people though.
Personally, I'd like to be working on something that extends the state-of-the-art a little, even if only by a tiny fraction. It can be one for the other disciplines involved - it doesn't have to be the software I'm writing that is responsible for that (and it usually isn't), but that's what I derive satisfaction from.