krellor

Because they are referring to engineering disciplines that predate all of the stuff you mention. When mechanical, structural, civic, etc engineers sign off on a design (stamp it) the incur personal liability if there is a defect in the design that kills someone or causes damage. There are certifications for telecom design and processes that require them to stamp designs, but otherwise most of what is lumped together as technology doesn’t constitute engineering from a legal or historical perspective. However the titles sort of took off and created two sets of meanings.

If software engineering was treated as engineering in the way that mechanical or others forms are, you would get a degree, get an entry level job at a firm as a junior, and after a few years, study and get certified to stamp designs/code systems, etc.

Now, outside of places like code for flight systems, medical devices, power plants, etc there isn’t a need for that kind of rigor, but those are the areas that would require licensing if it was available.

Good example. There’s some domains that do carry some liability and weight to the title. Flight systems, medical devices, etc. Domains where failure can kill people and can’t easily be rectified.

As of 2013 I believe, but it was discontinued in 2019. Fairly rare to see in the wild outside of specific domains like medical device coding or other areas where failure isn’t acceptable.

You do have stamping engineers for telecom design. As far as I know that’s the only real engineering title from the perspective that the sign off of the work carries well defined legal liability. I was director of engineering for a large org and the only stamping engineers in the org were telecom designers, not the security, software, systems, cloud, network, etc folks. Nothing against then either, but historically engineer meant something very specific prior to the rise of information technology.

Edit: actually in 2013 NCEES added a PE cert for software engineering, but it was discontinued on 2019.

I love the you can run bash on Windows 10 now.

I love docker but I swear docker and CI/CD pipelines are like catnip to the perfect in the way of the good crowd.

I don’t think it’s as much that the meta model was replicated as much as they fully open sourced it with a license for research and commercial use.

I actually think the market demand will be fairly small for fully offline AI. The largest potential customers might be government who require full offline hosting, and there is a small group of companies servicing that niche. But even government customers who require that their data is segmented are simply having enclaves setup by the big cloud platforms where they guarantee that inputed data isn’t fed into the training process and doesn’t leave the customer environment.

I fully support folks who sustain open source AI frameworks, but in terms of commercial customers that will drive industry trends with dollars, I expect there will be demand for hosted solutions that use proprietary models.