The facts that somebody is being professional, educated and ethical does not
guarantee that he has any idea of what he is doing. The catch is that a
clueless person is generally unware that he's clueless, so he can be quite
eithcal and professional in what he thinks he is doing. Watch the hordes
of ATM zealots - many of them with very impressive credentials. Does not
make their "contribution" any more worthwhile.
--vadim
> Now, I have mentioned three key words: engineer, professional, and ethics.
> As a student of engineering, I believe that these three words go
> hand-in-hand.The facts that somebody is being professional, educated and ethical does not
guarantee that he has any idea of what he is doing. The catch is that a
clueless person is generally unware that he's clueless, so he can be quite
eithcal and professional in what he thinks he is doing. Watch the hordes
of ATM zealots - many of them with very impressive credentials. Does not
make their "contribution" any more worthwhile.
Yeah, but at least they have a code of ethics. Where'd ours
go?
---------========== J.D. Falk <jdfalk@cybernothing.org> =========---------
> OKINA MAKETSU IPPAI NO UISUKI, ONEGAI SHIMASU! |
----========== http://www.cybernothing.org/jdfalk/home.html ==========----
I think that most of us act as ethically as management permits. There's a
reason why vendors bring an "engineer" along on sales calls; customers have
a very solid understanding that nobody else (sales, marketing, etc) can be
trusted. That's not to say every "engineer" is without ulterior motives,
but they're virtually guaranteed to be the most ethical people you'll meet
at any company.
What happens when a civil engineer refuses to certify a bridge is safe?
What happens when a network engineer refuses to certify a network will work?
Why is there a difference, and what can we do about it?
Stephen "Engineer" Sprunk
Stephen Sprunk, K5SSS, CCIE#3723
Network Consulting Engineer
Cisco NSA Dallas, Texas, USA
e-mail:ssprunk@cisco.com
Pager: +1 800 365-4578
Empowering the Internet Generation
It seems you are going out of trhe real problem's roots.
Let's image someone is a real _network engeneer_, who can understand the
problem (in the big backbone such as UUnet's or QWEST or simular IP
backbone), and solve it. Do you think such engeneer would be interested
in working as the _support boy_?
I think - no. He'll found more interesting work, because he want to learn
every day, to build something new, etc - he want to grow up as an
engeneer.
But if I image something strange and this young man will be hired as a
_support engeneer_ - he have only 2 choices for the career. First is if
he show himself as a bright engeneer solving any problems and able to
understand the reasons of any complex failure - he'll run to Cisco and
got CCIE diploma, than he'll find some more interesting work (even in the
same company). In the best case he'll work as a _seniour network
engeneer_ serving VIP customers, not more.
Or he'll work as a _support engeneer_ for a few years - and loss the
ability to investigate the really complex (and rare) failures and
situations.
There is the real problem for the ISP - you (ISP) need high skilled
persons to understand the complex situations appeared once/year, but
could not provide an interesting work and high salary to satisfy their
professional (and career's) interests. It cause the every company to have
2 - 3 of the such people maximum. In the small company, the customers
have a chance to contact them directly in case of high energency, in the
big TELCO - no any chance at all. Just what we see here - if you get IP
service from the huge international company, you got good service in case
of the standard situations but could not resolve any nonstandard; if
you'v got the service from the middle-size European company, you waste
some time when you need every-days service, but you can easy contact
high-skilled personal in case of emergency (I do not want to name here
the companies we have experience with, but this example was picked up
from the real life).
I do not know if there is the real problem with the _where to found well
skilled network ENGENEER's_ at all - may be it exists, may be not, in
USA; but even if I found such engeneer (and if I was the ISP's CEO here)
I face some other problem - how to pay him the salary and (!) the
interesting job (because the interesting job is the kind of salary for
the such people too - at least because it allow to learn more and promise
the better carreer).
What happens when a civil engineer refuses to certify a bridge is safe?
What happens when a network engineer refuses to certify a network will
work?
Why is there a difference, and what can we do about it?
I'm not sure that's the right question. Here's the real question: What
happens when a civil engineer certifies a bridge as safe, that isn't? He
goes to jail and his license is revoked. He's barred from the field.
What happens when a network engineer says a system will work that doesn't?
There are no civil or criminal penalties. The PE process is a two-way
street - you get the perks, but there are also consequences for misbehavior.
Daniel L. Golding
Sr. Internet Engineer
Cypress Communications
(and a degreed ME)
You gotta be kidding. When was the last time that you talked to a
sales engineer? Most of those (generalizing here, so obviously there
are exceptions) aren't any good at engineering but have learned the
buzzwords. There is a reason why they aren't doing systems work.
People just come in all shapes. Some honest some not. Doesn't matter
what proffession or title. Sales people generally don't really know
enough to lie even when they do.
Dirk
How long is this thread going to last?
D.
What's wrong about a good thread lasting long ?
Darin Divinia wrote: