Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Icloud leak writ large (Score 1) 207

Yea, I'm well aware of how that works, but ANY exposure to the internet creates a remote attack surface that a bad actor can exploit. You are giving them a lot of credit thinking that they have locked it down so tight that it will be that difficult to get into. It may not be trivial, but I have known more than my fair share of blackhats that did that shit for fun and they weren't just a bunch of script kiddies.

Comment Re:Icloud leak writ large (Score 1) 207

It doesn't expose itself by default to the internet with a default username and password.

.... Didn't the summary straight up say it automatically uploads the pictures to the cloud? How exactly is that not connected and exposed to the internet by default? I mean it might not have a default username and password but no company every took any shortcuts or did something outside best security practices right?

Comment Re:Medieval Guild Structure (Score 1) 727

While I'll give you some of that probably is engineers protecting jobs, not all of it is that. It isn't much different than doctors being regulated. What engineers do can impact people's lives in very dramatic ways and when we live in a capitalist society there will be bad actors that want to take advantage of a lack of regulations to make a quick buck. In some spaces it may be over-reaching and may be twisted in ways that are essentially just protecting jobs and such, but I don't think all of it is bad at all.

Also, just FYI, the US isn't different for getting a P.E. You have to be endorsed by 3 active P.E. holders to get the license.

Comment Re:If you do engineering, you should be recognized (Score 1) 727

Actually in the eyes of the public and law it does. Also, the entire board is made of up valid P.E. holders in almost every state as far as I know (I think it may be required in most) and that requires them to pass the F.E. exam, the P.E. exam, and regularly resubmit documentation (think its every two years) showing they have furthered their engineering knowledge in a meaningful way (University classes, etc.) in order to renew their P.E. These are not just some bureaucrats that decide who is and who isn't given a license these are actually people within the fields. Most, if not all, would easily destroy any simple test you put before them.

Comment Re:It's a common enough term (Score 1) 727

Ok, two things wrong with this statement. One, your company will not be fined into oblivion for using the term engineer on the employees that do not hold valid P.E.s because the law specifically states that anyone working under the direction of a licensed engineer (within their field of focus) can be referred to as an engineer without fear of repercussion. Your company has valid P.E. holders on the payroll and this can even come into play if the company just hires a P.E. to stamp drawings/designs for a specific project, but it is only in context to that project. This is a standard statute in almost every state as far as I know (I am most familiar with my state obviously, but in my Engineering Ethics course this was part of the basic curriculum).

Two, and this is more relevant to TFA, the term engineer is only restricted when used in a publicly funded project or setting related to public projects. Engineer can be used for private projects and companies as long as it doesn't involve public funding or projects/infrastructure in general. This is where the guy got into trouble. He emailed the public engineering board about a public project/public infrastructure claiming to be an engineer with an issue. By the state laws he is misrepresenting himself as an engineer within context to what he is talking about.

I, as a software engineer, can legally talk about how shitty or great I think private entities programs/sites/apps/whatever software related thing and refer to myself as a software engineer as long as it doesn't have crap to do with public projects or public funding. If I start doing that with public stuff I can get into legal trouble (though this is a grey area for software specifically since the software P.E. is only 3 years old and it is still not well defined from what I understand how their stamping even works). I can complain all I want about those public projects or infrastructure as long as I don't claim to be an engineer. Again, if I am working under a licensed engineer this changes, but that also has to be spelled out and clear that I am not the license holder.

The last exception is if you are working on obtaining a P.E. or you hold an accredited engineering degree from a recognized university. You can then be referred to as an 'Engineer in Training' or 'Engineer Intern' if you have passed the first exams or as a graduate engineer respectively. This does not apply to non-accredited engineering degrees however (accredited actually varies state to state too if I remember correctly, some states require that the degree is ABET accredited to qualify for that distinction, others allow any recognized University degree to qualify for it).

Basically, these are laws designed to prevent joe blow from designing bridges or other things that the public relies on and funds without actually being qualified. It is the same idea as someone not wanting some jackass that watched a youtube video to attempt surgery on them or a loved one.

Comment Re:Pretty obvious (Score 1) 388

This is a much nicer way of saying people don't like change. There are merits to your comment, but I also feel like if everyone isn't Apple, or what have you, and lets your use older revisions, who the fuck cares? Now, there is more to it if you are forced to update to the newest revision all the time, but even then, people need to accept to some degree the software is GOING to change and not just stubbornly yell down anything that changes the software in any way (which is what is sounds like the OP is talking about).

Hell, one of the biggest differences/advantages in software engineering vs. other types of engineering is we can change stuff quickly and without near the same impact. I once worked with a mechanical engineer that fucked up the hole punches on several thousand feet of conveyor by only about 1/2 inch, guess how costly that was? Meanwhile, it might suck if my report calculation was slightly off, but I can update my software in a mater of minutes and it barely costs anything.

Comment Re:Complexity (Score 2) 388

Ha! If adding a few features makes the software that much worse that just means you can figure out that developer sucks a lot faster (and the code you were already using probably sucks too and is full of holes you just don't know about yet). I'll admit, I am not the biggest fan of rapid release models because of stability issues and it puts more value on unit testing over system testing which can be dangerous, but adding small feature sets should not make the software that much buggier if someone actually does it well.

Comment Re:Do you code? (Score 5, Insightful) 388

That is a pretty bad assumption and very out of touch with actual development. If something really isn't worth it or would take too much time, I simply tell people that or completely ignore the suggestion if its too outrageous. However, that doesn't mean I want the users to shut up and just let daddy developer do whatever I want. I want feedback because I can't possible test everything, I can't predict all the trends for usage, and any half decent developer loves to see people using their software to accomplish things they never even envisioned when it was written (not hacking it per se, but finding use cases we hadn't thought of yet).

In fact, it is more ridiculous for the users to just immediately jump on and start bashing ideas when they have no idea how to actually engineer it or how much time it would take to implement that feature. If someone actually writes real software (not some garbage scipts they threw together either) and wants to comment concerns that is more in line, but even then, just because I write software doesn't mean I know how all software is designed... If a developer starts asking for opinions on it, different story, but people jumping all over it when THEY don't write code is much more ridiculous in my opinion.

Ideas don't cost me shit. Again, if I don't like doesn't mean I have to implement it (unless there is a contract, but that is a different ballgame then what were talking about). I'll take a glut of stupid suggestions with a few good ones over nothing at all any day.

Comment Re:People hate change. (Score 3, Insightful) 388

I wish it were just that. I've been writing and deploying enterprise systems for years and it is still basically people just don't like change even if the change is vastly superior to what they had before. I've literally had people for the first month tell me how much this new system is terrible and was a waste of money and then I talk to them 3 months later after they actually have USED it and complete reversal with nothing but praise for the new system... Most people don't like learning is the bottom line. They want to show up, do the same thing they have for years, clock out and collect a pay check. Same thing for most users outside enterprise stuff too, they don't want the application to change because they hate to learn new stuff.

Submission + - F-16 Jets Converted to Fly as Wing-men Drones (

Zmobie writes: In a new program the US Air Force has converted and tested F-16 planes as drones able to fly with complex mission parameters. The program is designed to use retiring F-16 jets to act as autonomous wing-men for manned F-35 jets and fly their own strike missions. From the Article: "The US has used F-16 drones before as realistic targets for the F-35 to blow up in training, but on Monday it announced fully autonomous air-to-air and ground strike capabilities as a new capability thanks to joint research between the service and Lockheed Martin's legendary Skunkworks.... But having F-16 drones plan and fly their own missions is only part of a much larger picture. The future of the US Air Force may well depend on advanced platforms like F-35s commanding fleets of unmanned drones which can act as additional ears, eyes, and shooters in the sky during battles."

Comment Umm, Standard Library anyone? (Score 1) 338

I'm sorry this just sounds idiotic. Isn't this basically just creating a giant standard library and making it so you write the "program" in a functional spec, which would probably get messed up if the wording syntax isn't perfect, hence the ENTIRE REASON we have highly precise programming languages that follow the exact lines the programmer wrote?

They're basically just trying to introduce either fuzzy language programming so that the same sentence written 3 ways gives you the same code (that you probably don't want) or essentially write a new version of COBOL so that non developers can write terrible code... Yea, not fearing for my job even a little bit, especially given that this "AI" even with long term development will be highly unlikely to architect a system or do much outside of a handful of languages (much less language interoperability). On top of that they straight up say in TFA that the damn thing can't solve much beyond 5 lines of code!

Slashdot Top Deals

"Roman Polanski makes his own blood. He's smart -- that's why his movies work." -- A brilliant director at "Frank's Place"