What serious legal implications are you on about? I work with three security teams, an ethics board, and legal. My software doesn't even touch anything that would come close to causing harm, and that's just in my area.
In some states, it's illegal to advertise oneself as an "engineer" if they're not the kind of engineer that is recognized by the NCEES. That's not the norm, usually just falsely claiming to be an engineer is simply annoying and left at that.
I mean, the term has existed since '60s so it's not like this is a marketing thing that's brand new or anything, and the NCEES used to offer it. I dunno if I give a shit what Texas state law says about anything, really. But again I don't get your weird gatekeeping over the term, it sounds kind of like a pet peeve that's not even yours that you've picked up as a cause.
The term "software engineer" has been used since the 60's in an effort to elicit some kind of sophisticated creation of software for the purpose of handling NATO nuclear warheads. There was a pretty obvious and explicit desire to have reliable code for something that deadly, and the care into making that software could be described as "engineering" but the use of the term was nonetheless criticized anyway because it took decades for the related software development to be satisfactory for NATO.
And, to be perfectly honest, I don't think it's as important to get your stuff made right as it was for NATO.
There was no single source. Margaret Hamilton used it entirely unbidden by that application to describe what she was doing for the Apollo missions.
I've worked with dozens and dozens of mechanical, electrical, optical, and environmental engineers as well as scientists and you are literally the first person I've ever spoken to who has given any shits about this.
I mean I have met run-of-the-mill web devs and Java coders that call themselves "software engineers" so the term is abused too much to bother giving many graces.
Yeah I again don't really see any issue with that nor have any of my colleagues expressed any concern over that whatsoever. It's sort of like getting mad at the number of deans in American colleges like yes, there's a sort of title spam happening there, but it's irrelevant because who gives a fuck
What serious legal implications are you on about? I work with three security teams, an ethics board, and legal. My software doesn't even touch anything that would come close to causing harm, and that's just in my area.
you can start with this
In some states, it's illegal to advertise oneself as an "engineer" if they're not the kind of engineer that is recognized by the NCEES. That's not the norm, usually just falsely claiming to be an engineer is simply annoying and left at that.
I mean, the term has existed since '60s so it's not like this is a marketing thing that's brand new or anything, and the NCEES used to offer it. I dunno if I give a shit what Texas state law says about anything, really. But again I don't get your weird gatekeeping over the term, it sounds kind of like a pet peeve that's not even yours that you've picked up as a cause.
The term "software engineer" has been used since the 60's in an effort to elicit some kind of sophisticated creation of software for the purpose of handling NATO nuclear warheads. There was a pretty obvious and explicit desire to have reliable code for something that deadly, and the care into making that software could be described as "engineering" but the use of the term was nonetheless criticized anyway because it took decades for the related software development to be satisfactory for NATO.
And, to be perfectly honest, I don't think it's as important to get your stuff made right as it was for NATO.
There was no single source. Margaret Hamilton used it entirely unbidden by that application to describe what she was doing for the Apollo missions.
I've worked with dozens and dozens of mechanical, electrical, optical, and environmental engineers as well as scientists and you are literally the first person I've ever spoken to who has given any shits about this.
okay I concede it's silly of me to be pedantic with someone who does softwares in such a multi-disciplinary implementation
I mean if that's the case aren't you still risking being pedantic with others without knowing what they do?
I mean I have met run-of-the-mill web devs and Java coders that call themselves "software engineers" so the term is abused too much to bother giving many graces.
Yeah I again don't really see any issue with that nor have any of my colleagues expressed any concern over that whatsoever. It's sort of like getting mad at the number of deans in American colleges like yes, there's a sort of title spam happening there, but it's irrelevant because who gives a fuck