HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com (James Hanlon)
Subject: Re: Software as PE
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:25:05 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:
 ...excellent sketch of an engineering professional deleted..

: In article <522322457DN5.61R@tanda.isis.org> marc@tanda.isis.org writes:
: >
: >        No electronic engineer has ever advertised himself as expert
: >        only with the "Apex Model 5 Logic Analyser".
: 
: Software engineers advertise themselves this way because the hiring
: managers typically hire this way.  I would like to see the day when
: hiring managers put more weight on how good an engineer the candidate
: is ...
: 
: Hans Lachman
: lachman@netcom.com

Management apparently believe that the "hire the exact language match"
technique works, or it would not persist as long as it has. Software
professionals play the game cynically, flooding entire resume pages with
acronyms and buzzwords, hoping for a hit. It's a meaningless, destructive,
dynamic; breaking it is in practice extremely difficult (I know; I've tried).
As to what is perpetuating this situation, I think that management theory
is predicated on the successful metrication of manufacturing and distribution
firms, largely in the automobile industry, in the mid-twentieth century.
Hence the glorification of Taylor, Shewhart, and Deming, et al.. Their
ideas of work flow, inventory management, statistical quality control--so
valid when marrying crankshafts to engine blocks--are simply not appropriate
to abstractions realized in discrete systems. No one in management realizes,
or admits, this, and so we see "metrics" like LOC taken seriously--even worse,
we see time derivatives, extrapolations, even statistical variance, used to
justify decisions regarding substantial portions of a business's resources.
The spectacle of highly-paid managers looking at graphs of square roots
of LOC counts is appalling enough, but when it affects my livelihood, I
cringe. I mean, chi-square! Of conditional logic! Somebody give those guys
a cylinder head.

So, I think management is simply wrongheaded, and is doomed to fail until
an appropriate system model is substituted for the current manufacturing one.
Otherwise, "I have produced 2000 lines of C code for the SPARC" will continue
to be an attractive attribute of a potential hire.

Jim Hanlon
tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com


Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,comp.software-eng
From: dmmatt@bigez (Mike Mattix)
Subject: Re: Software as PE
Organization: Monsanto Agricultural Company
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:36:34 GMT

In article <C0Hu83.Gpp@ddsw1.mcs.com>, tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com (James Hanlon) writes:
> lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:
> : 
> : I forgot one important point (and possibly others):
> : 
> : - can handle or at least help with administrative tasks, such as
> :   project planning (estimating schedules, estimating manpower and
> :   equipment requirements), managing a bug-tracking database, and
> :   doing engineering-related paperwork (like patent applications)
> : 
> With these sorts of talented engineers on the job, who needs managers?
> Or do they realize that?
> 
> 
 I can't help myself...

 1. Induce/create inefficiencies
 2. Throttle creativity
 3. Create political environment

   etc.
-- 
Mike Mattix
Agricultural Group of Monsanto
P.O. Box 174
Luling, LA 70070
INTERNET Address: dmmatt@bigez.monsanto.com
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,comp.software-eng,misc.jobs.misc
From: me@vikings.austin.ibm.com (Michael E)
Subject: Re: Software as PE
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 01:02:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Folly!
Keywords: managers, sales dept, punch cards, Edsels

*** My opin only ***

In article <C0Hu83.Gpp@ddsw1.mcs.com> tcubed@ddsw1.mcs.com (James Hanlon) writes:
>lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:
		:
	< stuff concerning the definition of a software engineer >
		:
>With these sorts of talented engineers on the job, who needs managers?
	The sales department- they're next on the list.
>Or do they realize that?
	No- that's why they're managers.

"Well, there goes this year's pay raise. All $20 of it."



Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,comp.software-eng,misc.jobs.misc
From: lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman)
Subject: Re: Software as PE
Organization: Netcom
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:21:48 GMT

In <889520164DN5.61R@tanda.isis.org> marc@tanda.isis.org writes:
>
>  "Software Engineer" is a meaningless and misleading term.
>  ... Software Engineer is the fashionable euphemism for Programmer ....

In my opinion, a "software engineer", in addition to being a competent
programmer, should also have the following characteristics:

- understands and applies general engineering principles
- has at least a passing knowledge of other engineering and/or
  physical science fields, helping him/her communicate with
  technical professionals of other backgrounds
- knows how use a library to research a technical topic
- understands the fundamentals of computer hardware design and
  operating systems
- knows well-known programming techniques not specific to one
  language (like stuff from Knuth's books)
- can do "systems analysis" (product requirements analysis, functional
  analysis)
- can write good functional specification and design specification
  documents
- is familiar with commonly-accepted software modeling methods
  (e.g., data flow diagrams)
- knows enough about the state of the art to identify, most of the
  time, when a proposed solution is a reinvention of the wheel
- has a level of judgement that results in good cost/benefit trade-offs
- can write implementation notes that help future maintainers of
  his/her code
- can create effective test plans
- can communicate effectively, regarding his/her software, with other
  departments (e.g., other development teams, software test, software
  integration, marketing, product documentation, customer support)

Anyone who demonstrates the above characteristics qualifies as a software
engineer, in my book.  (Sorry, no black-and-white, 1-or-0 tests.)

In article <522322457DN5.61R@tanda.isis.org> marc@tanda.isis.org writes:
>
>        No electronic engineer has ever advertised himself as expert
>        only with the "Apex Model 5 Logic Analyser".

Software engineers advertise themselves this way because the hiring
managers typically hire this way.  I would like to see the day when
hiring managers put more weight on how good an engineer the candidate
is, based on criteria like those in my list above, and put secondary
weight on whether the candidate knows how to tweak bit X in operating
system Y.

Hans Lachman
lachman@netcom.com
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:8304 alt.amateur-comp:471 soc.culture.usa:9453 alt.activism:20037
From: morpheus <morpheus@entropy.mcds.com>
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.amateur-comp,soc.culture.usa,alt.activism
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Clinton Office Requests Comments
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 18:42:25 EST
Organization: No Pity For The Majority!  [private]

bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden) writes:

> I will agree that you do have a large number of libertarians in the
> programming ranks. I don't have any good ideas of why, but you can
> definately tell the difference between the people taking engineering
> classes and programming classes (much more libertarian). 

Perhaps because niether libertarians nor programmers have much tolerance for
(in their opinion) pointless limitations imposed by {government|system
architecture}... perhaps not.

- morpheus (way beyond libertarian..)


morpheus@entropy.mcds.com ("morph")    |    My life is for itself, and not a
Obsolete deity for hire.  Cheap.       |         spectacle.  - Emerson
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mdb@netcom.com (Mark Bisgeier)
Subject: Re: Legal question re pseudonymity online
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 03:23:39 GMT

mkj@world.std.com (Mahatma Kane-Jeeves) writes:

> ... John sues the BELL.  My question: Does he have a case? ...

I think BELL's argument would be that by logging on to a public conferencing
board, John could not have had any reasonable expectation of privacy;
surely he would know that unidentified members of the public would have
access to his name. (It's not clear that merely giving his name would allow
someone to identify him and/or his phone #/address....). BELL could more
specifically protect itself by posting an advisory to all potential
subscribers that they assume the risk of participation on the board.

Furthermore, BELL would argue that since it is a private board, it can set
its own policies re pseudonymity, at least as long as they are rational
policies and don't discriminate among users on the basis of some
illegitimate classification (e.g., race); a subscriber's celebrity could
arguably be a good reason for differentiating the pseudonym rules.

The fact that BELL was aware of previous incidents of harrassment might give
rise to some obligation to inform subscribers generally of that fact; but so
long as the policy prohibiting pseudonyms has a reasonable basis, the
existence of some risk to the subscribers probably shouldn't be borne
entirely by the board.  A contrary policy would probably drive the boards
out of business.  (If the government decided in its infinite wisdom that
such boards were not good public policy, it could legislate that such risks
be borne entirely by the boards; this would be a roundabout way of
legislating them out of existence without an outright prohibition.)

-- 

Mark Bisgeier              mdb@netcom.com

        ...Let your mind wander... 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: z3kpw@ttacs1.ttu.edu ("Wheeler, Kevin")
Subject: stuff to read for free
Date: 8 Jan 93 06:51:00 CST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA16606; Fri, 8 Jan 93 05:00:51 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA14001; Fri, 8 Jan 93 05:00:46 -0800
X-To: "comp.org.eff.talk.usenet" <comp.org.eff.talk.usenet>


  _   _
 ((___))
 [ x x ] cDc communications
  \   /  Global Domination Update - shortform
  (' ')  #10 - January 1, 1993
   (U)
 
New gNu NEW gnU new GnU nEW gNu neW gnu nEw releases for January, 1993:
 
 _________________________________/Text Files\_________________________________
 
201: "One Wrong Move" by The Deth Vegetable.  We start '93 off right with this
strong cDc debut from Deth Veggie.  An artist with a shotgun?  You KNOW it's
gonna be rad.
 
202: "Monster Jennifer, or Celibacy Can Kill You" by Omega.  Another '93 cDc
debut by Omega, sysop of Moody Loners With Handguns BBS and author of a tech
article published in the November, '92 issue of MONDO 2000.  Let's sing!
"Jennifer, hey, it's Jennifer... she's got a penis, hey wow, she's really
beautiful and kinda crazy... HEY!  IT'S JENNIFER!"
 
203: "The Briefing" by Reid Fleming.  Yet ANOTHER cDc debut, this one a
gripping tale of political intrigue and space aliens.  "Mr. President, you're
NOT on Candid Camera."
 
204: "Life in General" by Video Vindicator.  Mr. Fraud himself takes keyboard
in hand to deliver a heaping batch of opinions for you to ponder.  He disses
lame females!  He disses lame cars!  This file's got it all!
 
205: "That Which Strikes Terror Into the Hearts of Men" by Lady Carolin.  A
creepy old house, a dorky womanizer, and a mad grrrl with a chainsaw boogie
down!  Wooh!  It's the battle of the sexes!  ACTION!  ZOW!!
 
206: "The Power of Art" by THE NIGHTSTALKER.  It's the crazed man with feces on
his mind, mailing lumps of his bowel's best work to the President's lovely
daughter.  How touching!  Never let it be said that cDc lacks tender-hearted
affection!  We're all very fuzzy and warm.
 
207: "F23" by Obscure Images.  Ominous cyberpunk innuendo stuff with
mind-control and Catholic confessions.  You know it's REAL cyberpunk 'cause it
was a t-file FIRST.
 
208: "A Visit to the Slaughterhouse" by Transderm-Nitro.  Hey hey - let's go on
a pleasant little jaunt down to the slaughterhouse and kill us some cows! 
Yeehaw.  It's educational - Mr. Nitro breaks it on down for YOU.  Dead cows,
it's a subject EVERYONE's interested in.
 
209: "Helmet Interview: July 17, 1992" by G.A. Ellsworth.  Transcription of
G.A. interviewing Page Hamilton, singer and bandleader of Helmet.
 
210: "My Shit, and How to Strangle It" by Tequila Willy.  He's wacky and he's
got intestinal worms!  Read all about it!
 
         All files are available NOW from ftp.eff.org in pub/cud/cdc.
 

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
Subject: Re: Federal Register Available on Internet
Keywords: federal register government documents WINDO GPO gore
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: comp
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:54:55 GMT

I called CounterPoint and got the following information:

The daily Internet service costs $5,000 per year.  They are also
going to be charging for searching at some undetermined per/character
amount.  They also sell a weekly CD-ROM for $1,950 per year subscription.



-- 
Glenn Tenney
voice: (415) 574-3420      fax: (415) 574-0546
tenney@netcom.com          Ham radio: AA6ER
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 19:03:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.120157.6068@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:

>In any case, I think email is more appropriate than the public forum
>for pointing out the details (involving personal issues) what someone
>thinks is the problem.

Yet without some reference to the details of the conduct you're
criticizing, how can readers of this conference know which conduct is
objectionable? What one person thinks is harassment may be seen by another
as reasonable discourse. For an example of this, see below.

>>Are there other fields in which problem-solving is done without any
>>mention of the particulars of the problem?
>
>Wise-ass cracks like the above two lines are a good example of what I
>was talking about.

I'm not sure how the two lines you refer to here constitute a
"wise-ass crack." Perhaps you could explain your reasoning?


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: rpowers@panix.com (Richard Powers)
Subject: Re: Beneficial Virus?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:55:33 GMT

In <BETSYS.93Jan7025917@ra.cs.umb.edu> betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:

>I don't care what you do on your home computer. The post I was
>responding to mentionned the virus executing on *other* systems and
>testing on these *other* systems for the presence of a marker file.

Are you just _refusing_ to have an intelligent debate?  (As well as to 
quote).  

The marker file concept exists as a method of keeping the virus from
spreading to *other* systems accidentally.

I fail to see how my post <C0GF9q.2yF@panix.com>, which you are
responding to above, does not fit your idea of being relevant to this
discussion. 
-- 
 Richard Powers    / Huh?  David Letterman is whipping  / Apathy.
rpowers@panix.com / his microphone with a rubber hose. /
	         /  No, wait!  Thats beef jerky!      /   Hail Eris! 

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: "Civil Disobedience" et al.
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 23:37:45 GMT

In article <1ifjgtINN3sp@phakt.usc.edu> dleslie@phakt.usc.edu (David Leslie) writes:

>	Why don't you just post some of the stuff out of alt.sex.stories?
>It is about as relevant, and you should get some mail(If that is your
>true measure of success).

Wait a minute. You're saying Thoreau is no more relevant to people
concerned about electronic freedoms than the postings to alt.sex.stories
are? If so, you have given civil libertarians like me a very strong
argument for subscribing to alt.sex.stories.

>If you are implying that he said that Thoreau was a 60's radical; I guess
>you are totally wrong. There is a difference between '1960s nostalgia' and
>"..nostalgia for 1960s radicals."  The way you(plural) are jumping on 
>this guy shows a severe lack of tolerance. 

It seems ironic for someone to condemn a Thoreau reprint, then criticize
others for a lack of tolerance. 


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
From: Shawn.K..Quinn@f7550.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Shawn K. Quinn)
Sender: Usenet@f-454.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: legal question re anonymity online
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 04:56:19 -0600

On Jan 08 08:47, All heard the following from Hans Lachman
(lachman@netcom.com):

 HL> If I own an auditorium and you rent it from me, and you give a 
 HL> controversial speech, and then someone vandalizes your house, it's not my 
 HL> fault.  If I own a store, and I allow you to post a controversial notice in

 HL> my shop window, but only under the condition that your name appears on the

 HL> notice, and you agree, then it's not my fault if someone vandalizes your 
 HL> house. If I own a soap factory, and you get a soap box produced by me, and

 HL> stand on it to deliver your message....

I wonder if anyone has ever sued a soap factory for that... But seriously, this
touches on another point I've wondered about: how are we going to stop abuses of
the legal system in these instances? The late 80s and early 90s are almost
becoming the "age of the lawsuit."

Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@urchin.fidonet.org>
PGP public key fingerprint: 9F A5 0B D1 3A FA 5A FF  A5 FA 2E 6D 5E A5 8F 7A
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: legal question re anonymity online
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:08:38 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

IMHO, John Q. doesn't have a case. the fact that he's bringing it 
against BELL instead of the perpetrator is an indication of just how 
screwed up the current system is. if he -were- able to win such a 
case it'd spell death for any number of online information services.

if John Q. Luser joined BELL knowing that the conditions were less 
than what he might have liked, -he's- responsible for the fact that 
his name got out. likewise, the molotov-tossing freak should be 
responsible for his actions, not the communication entity that 
allowed him contact with people with different opinions.

unfortunately, in today's climate, Mr. Luser probably -does- have a 
case & BELL could quite probably get screwed. such a precident is 
scary, to say the least...

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,`   "Renaissance Now! Think Universally, Act Selfishly" - Tim Starr   `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
From: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Re: Internet Connection to Congress
Reply-To: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:56:58 GMT


ae547@yfn.ysu.edu responds:

I found this posted in misc.activism.progressive.
 Does anyone know anything about it?

  It would be good to know what the email addresses are, then we can
help Congress test them.
 
In a previous article, rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel) says:

>/** pn.announcemen: 50.0 **/
>** Topic: Internet Connection to Congress **
>** Written 10:38 pm  Jan  1, 1993 by peacenet in cdp:pn.announcemen **
>~From: <peacenet>
>~Subject: Internet Connection to Congress
>
>/* Written 11:10 pm  Dec 30, 1992 by jlohrmann@igc.apc.org in igc:elections.usa */
>~From: <jlohrmann>
>~Comments:     Originally-From: loeb@ai.mit.edu (Eric Loeb)
>~From: Lee Sakkas <URLS@MARISTC.BITNET>
>~Subject:      News from Eric Loeb on Congress/Internet connectivity
>
>This came this morning from Eric Loeb at MIT via one of the
>Clinton servers.  It is definitely a step in the right direction
>and I think he has the right idea on how we can utilize our
>skills to good advantage to help promote and nurture it.
>Lee Sakkas
>--------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------
>
>It turns out that all members of the House of Reps.
>are going to have the option of accepting email over
>an internet gateway to the House system as of January.
>
>The new House system (ISIS) will be released then.  It
>is in test now.
>
>I would recommend that we all go out and volunteer to help
>our local congressional district office with their
>computers.  At some point we will also each need to take
>some responsibility for getting a good lobbying effort
>going within our districts, so that our congress-people
>will know that the Internet connection is desired by the
>constituents.
>
>
>eric
>
>** End of text from cdp:pn.announcemen **
>
-- 
Ronda Hauben                    email address:ae547@yfn.ysu.edu
Amateur Computerist Newsletter              or
P.O. Box 4344                   rhauben@heartland.bradley.edu
Dearborn, MI 48126
From: Bruce.Hayden.Of.285/1@ivgate.omahug.org (Bruce Hayden Of 285/1)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Clinton Office Requests Comments
Date: 03 Jan 93 00:14:22 CST
Reply-To: bruce.hayden.of.285/1@ivgate.omahug.org
Organization: 
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk

(From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden))
(Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.)

wkaufman@us.oracle.com (William Kaufman) writes:

>    That's the libertarians, who try not to classify themselves as
>either liberal or conservative, because the conservative, Barry
>Goldwater-style ones would get into small arms fire with the anarchist,
>Emma Goldman-style ones, and wreck the party.

>    If Usenet is any reasonable sample, though, there *does* seem to be
>a relation between being a programmer and a libertarian.  I don't think
>anyone can prove a definite correlation; but my guess is that the two
>are related by the fact that programmers are overwhelmingly white,

I do not think that it is really because programmers are white, educated,
upper-middle-class. These characteristics would usually correspond to
either a conservative, or liberal inteligensia, and not libertarian. 
The white upper-middle-class has the most to gain by stability (hence
conservatism, if not politically, at least in life style). They tend
to be the strongest supporters of societal values, including the police,
because they have the most to lose if society fails.

I will agree that you do have a large number of libertarians in the
programming ranks. I don't have any good ideas of why, but you can
definately tell the difference beteople who is educated in a conventional
engineering
discipline and got into software after about 15 years of conventional
practice.  I was able to watch the evolution of my brand of engineering
(nuclear instrumentation) move from the sliderule era through the 
calculator and