![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vit_rRequest for comments.
Below is a number of Vit's informal constructive definitions.
Note: The word "constructive" is used here in its mathematical meaning. A constructive definition denotes a class of members and generates a method that can define, if a real or abstract object, process or concept belongs to this class or not. The word "constructive" does not mean "positive" or "encouraging" and the goal of a constructive definition is not to save the world but to communicate the correct meaning of terms.
0The engineering is
1a set of scientific, organizational and heuristic methods
2to predictably produce
3some original results.
4For instance: electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, social engineering.
5Science and art are not predictable.
6Craftsmanship and technology repeat previous results.
7The practical approach to engineering is an approach based
8on collecting
9of positive and negative first hand experience
10over many years.
11The scientific approach to engineering is an approach based
12on quick collecting
13of mostly positive informations
14that are officially permitted
15to leave borders of an organization,
16on results of questionable experiments
17produced in artificial conditions
18and on construction of inappropriate mental models.
19The bureaucratic approach to engineering is an attempt
20to make production of some original results predictable
21by appointing responsibilities to random people
22and by introduction of rituals based
23on results of the scientific approach to engineering,
24on advertising of tool developers
25and on demands of certificate issuers.
26The system engineering is an engineering
27that fights technical chaos
28which appears on over-disciplinar level
29by production of complex systems.
30A system engineer is
31a middleman
32between engineers from different technical departments
33and between this engineers and the external world.
34A system engineer is responsible
35for the technical quality of a complex system.
36An experienced system engineer
37can observe
38the whole state of a complex system
39under development or maintenance.
40The system architecture is the topmost design of a system.
41A system architect is a person responsible
42for the system architecture
43and for the alignment of technical goals
44of all technical departments
45to goals of the produced or maintained system.
46The system design is the design of a system
47that includes subsystems.
48The system design on the topmost level
49is equivalent to the system architecture.
50A system designer is a person responsible for the system design.
51A system designer responsible
52for the topmost design
53is equivalent to a system architect.
54The system engineering
55reduces risks of unintended errors
56produced by miscommunication of technical information
57between different engineering departments
58and by incoherent communication
59of different engineering departments
60with the external world.
61Such risks can affect
62project deadlines,
63project budgets,
64the quality of produced complex systems
65and the rationality of their production.
66The system engineering does not deal with risks of
67intendent errors created on base of political reasons
68and unintended errors caused by incompetence
69of technical departments.
70However an experienced system engineer
71may be able
72to detect and to correct such errors.
73Explanatory notes:
74The terms "system engineering" and "systems engineering"
75are equivalent in this consideration
76however the version "systems engineering" is more popular now.
77The term "systems engineer" is rarely used
78because this could mean a person responsible for many systems
79and a system engineer is usually appointed only to a single system.
80The system architecture does not demand
81knowledge on the subsystem level.
82Either the system architecture nor the system design
83demands technical input from the bottom.
84This means they may be incorrect, not optimal or even not realistic.
85It is a bad habit to produce
86the system architecture and the system design
87without inputs from technical departments
88which are responsible for subsystems.
89This increases risks of errors and miscalculations.
90However not the system architect but the system engineer
91is responsible for this risks.
92A system architect and a system designer may be the same person
93who plays the role of a system engineer.
94However they also may be
95random people without technical knowledge and experience
96who are appointed to this tasks.
97System architects and system designers represent
98the external world
99for a system engineer.
100A system engineer transfers technical information
101between system designers (including system architects)
102and technical departments.
103This information transfer may be
104a proper communication
105or an unidirectional flow.
106The top-down design is a set of methods
107to construct a complex system
108by creating of a system architecture
109and further refinement of design
110to the state where direct orders
111can be appointed
112to responsible technical departments.
113The top-down engineering is a set of methods
114to create a system architecture
115on the base of knowledge
116of technical departments
117and further refinement and alignment
118of system design
119with design of subsystems.
120The bottom-up design is a set of beliefs
121that it is possible
122to assemble a correct complex system
123by adding together
124randomly developed subsystems.
125A project which aplies bottom-up design
126may produce acceptable results
127by big luck
128or after massive changes
129caused by finding errors
130by integrations tests.
131The model-based engineering is
132a practical,
133a scientific
134or a bureaucratic approach
135to support
136engineering
137and communication of technical information
138by production of
139mathematical,
140graphical
141or semantic models.
142There are also
143intuitive engineering,
144prototype-based engineering,
145bureaucracy-based engineering
146and other possibilities.
147The design thinking is a religious belief that
148the system architecture and the system design
149can be produced by people without technical knowledge.
150The systems thinking is a religious belief that
151some rituals
152and magical words
153can replace
154broad experience
155and deep knowledge.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 05:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 06:04 pm (UTC)What is a system administrator in a missile or locomotive development project?
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 07:12 pm (UTC)Also "service engineers" are usually not real engineers but technicians. Most software engineers are not engineers despite of the words printed on their business cards.
Please forget about software.
(Additionally most software systems are trivial. The complexity of software projects is usually born out of incompetence.)
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 08:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 08:12 pm (UTC)Во-первых, это набор определённых конструктивных определений, созданный для определённых целей.
Во-вторых, стоит обсуждать только эти определения, а не общее устройство мира.
В-третьих, это на самом деле совсем не про софт.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 08:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 09:19 pm (UTC)Потом, имея и инженерное, и айтишное образование, опыт работы в сложных инженерных проектах и многолетний опыт того, что называется software engineering, я могу применять практический подход к поиску определений, избегая ловушек научного и бюрократического подхода.
Для того, чтобы обсуждение, вообще, имело смысл, надо найти правильные определения, используя то, что называлось инженерией ещё с римских времён, а потом уже смотреть, насколько явления в области софтописания соответствуют этим определениям. Пытавшиеся идти другим путём написали много толстых мутных книжек, так и не справившись с задачей.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 09:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 09:10 pm (UTC)Everything's different here in US. And we don't care what the Germans think.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 10:07 pm (UTC)Andy Bechtolsheim had studied electrical engineering. He can be called as an engineer on base of his education but his achievements are in the domain of CS.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 10:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 09:45 pm (UTC)Please forget about software and the things mistakenly called by computer scientists as "bla-bla-bla engineering".
I mean the "real" engineering which is known for ages and which is the same in Germany, in USA, in India and in all other countries across the world. The fact that modern engineers use computers instead of manual methods and ancient devices does not change the essence of their profession.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-07 11:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 12:14 am (UTC)You use inappropriate arguments to defend wrong ideas. You could rename a secretary into an Office Manager, a cleaner into a Floor Designer and a bank clerk into a Financial Adviser. This cannot change anything except a line on a business card.
If you correct your search methods, you find Power Plant Systems Engineers, Vehicle Platform Systems Engineers, Combat Systems Engineers and other "truly engineering" positions that demand an education in engineering and many years of experience.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 01:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 06:58 am (UTC)People in IT use the "good" word "engineer" for marketing reasons because they are embarrassed to use more appropriate names such as "Linux system shaman" or "cloud virtualization system magician".
no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 02:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 05:06 am (UTC){x | x ∈ R, sin(x)=0.25 }
would a "constructive definition" in your sense but very much not constructive in the sense of
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mathematics-constructive/
Но это не точно. :) Может, я просто не выспался, могу путать.
no subject
Date: 2018-02-08 06:51 am (UTC)I also use the practical approach and my definitions are simplified. It is possible to use a scientific or a bureaucratic approach to term definition but the results would be not usable for practical purposes.
System Engineer or Systems Engineer
Date: 2018-02-11 12:36 pm (UTC)Pleas see Incose; https://www.incose.org/AboutSE/Careers
If you mean Systems Engineering, and by mistake write System Engineering, the confusing starts at once. Personally, it wold be helpful if the term System Engineer (s missing) could be avoided because it creates such a confusion. It is difficult enough to get people to understand.
I see many jobs advertised under the title "System Engineer" and in about 75% of the cases is a Designer for a specific system wanted (and not a Systems Engineer). In maybe 15% of the ads is actually a Systems Engineer asked for. In less than 10% of the advertised jobs in Systems Engineering, is per definition, in the heading and the content, correct.
Re: System Engineer or Systems Engineer
Date: 2018-02-11 01:31 pm (UTC)If you take a list of jobs in a company you rarely find something like "Projects Manager", "Vehicles Engineer", "Databases Administrator", "Products Lines Engineer". It is the common sense to trow out the arrogant and unpractical "s" from "Systems Engineering" and "Systems Engineers".
Of course there are "Requirements Engineers" but this is also a misleading term which could mean "Requirements Gathering Engineers", "Requirements Documentation Administrators" and many other not connected roles.