Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

> I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who ...

Even if those engineers clearly have a financial incentive to make biased claims?



sort by: page size:

Maybe it's just me but I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who replaces vowels with letters.

But strawman/direct attacks aside.

In my experience when one engineer is disagreeing with a team of engineers, they're wrong or the team a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem they're working to solve.


>"If you are a founder with reasonable engineer cred"

Can you expand on this? Are you of the mind that engineers should only trust other engineers?


>I trust any engineer who responds with an “it depends..” over someone who has an absolute answer.

That heuristic matches on the hordes of liars who try and sound smart while hedging their claims with a liberal application of weasel words to avoid being provably wrong. And those people outnumber the "good engineers" probably by at least an order of magnitude...


> So I get funny looks when I suggest that engineers should go talk to people in the business, and write design docs.

I've gotten more than funny looks. They get downright mean or irritated, because to them it sounds like you're trying to take their job away.

Remember, these are the people who bring the requirements to the engineers.They have people skills! Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcIMIyQnOso


> conflict between the opinions of a random person on HN and prominent engineers

On HN, i don't think you entirely know who among commentators is a prominent engineer.


> I just want to underline that a good engineer should not blindly trust anything, even if it seems to be written by a well received author.

Doesn't this also apply to the opinions of your friend who works at a FAANG? How do you judge between theirs and Fowler's view points?


> It's definitely not as ridiculous as what lots of experienced engineers are oddly saying

It's scary how many engineers are burning their credibility in exchange for some temporary internet points.


>He's an engineer, and there's a bunch of engineers who worked with him who will attest to that.

He's not, and all those quotes from that reddit thread I know you're thinking of are very careful to dance around the point.

He's not an engineer.


> I often feel that engineers write these posts because they know that they themselves are good at their job...

The Dunning-Kruger effect suggests that almost certainly, some non-zero proportion engineers who have written this type of posts are not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect


>This made me reconsider my opinion

Why? Plenty of engineers are complete idiots in many levels.


>Then why do thousands of engineers do then?

Just because something is a meme doesn't mean it's true or true all the time.


>Of course, I'm also baffled that people credit him as being a 'builder'

I'm on the other hand baffled that so many here are willing to spout off opinions like this without even so much as having listened to the man talk. He is _clearly_ an engineer's engineer.

This topic really highlights the people who form their entire mental model of reality around news headlines.


> As an engineer, it's tough to get past this mindset.

Seems that way considering how you're being downvoted. A shame.

As engineers, we should be more concerned with what actually works, not with what works inside our heads.


> ...but hey, the internet is full of really talented smart people who do excellent engineering work.

It's actually not. It's full of average people who do mediocre engineering.


Definitely, and if you read my original comment, I defended the engineer because he wasn't using the title as a deception or in soliciting business. Though he was potentially commenting outside his realm of expertise.

> So by No-FAANG engineer, you mean someone who isnt a robot ad hawker sell out?

Come now, is there any reason to throw those insults?


> A senior engineer should make evidence based decisions, as should any engineer.

... sooo there is no distinction between a senior engineer and a non-senior engineer? you've really said nothing in this comment.

senior engineers have seen enough things to know what the right solution is in many cases, without having to take a bunch of time to collect evidence. that's what makes them senior, not just 'good'.


> some middling engineer building smartphones for Apple.

> An EE professor at a well-regarded research university

Oddly enough, I'd trust the experience of an engineer over that of a professor basically every time.


> Idk why this keeps getting tied back to paid/unpaid

i was responding to a comment about engineering ethics. engineering is a profession. engineering ethics is taught to student engineers in the context of a job, where you're getting paid. taking the (literal classroom) lessons out of context distorts them.

if you go back to your engineering ethics professors and say "gee, but what if i do this work for fun and just stick it up on a web page on the internet", they're going to look at you like you're insane, and then not know what to say.

> If I build something in real life

the last thing this thread needs is more analogies.

next

Legal | privacy