Re: Tired of being called a geek?

Russell:

Thank you for your thoughtful answer. From some of what you said, though, I'm not sure if I got across the point I tried to make in my original posting.

Of course engineers need to get money for their time. As people move up into positions of more authority they typically have their salaries increased. I just think that there should be more engineers that move up the ladder (into positions where they have more authority AND make more money).

While I would enjoy spending time on discussing the merits of various thicknesses of my skin, I think a much more important point is that far to many technical decisions in America are being made by "managers" who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

Up until Sept 11th we could afford the luxury of letting these people "manage" [Quoted] us. It is only mildly embarrassing that we need to go to Japanese car dealerships if we want to buy a hybrid car.

Since Sept 11th, however, we live in a much more dangerous world. Bad technical decisions can now have deadly consequences. Anyone in this newsgroup can come up with more than just a few ideas on how the air traffic control system could have been designed to avoid the WTC attack. And, if they had been in positions of authority at the FAA with the very credible threats that the terrorists have been making for years, a far more robust air traffic control system would have been in place and the world trade center buildings would still be standing.

Authority flows from respect and, whether we like it or not, we live in a time and place where people develop respect from the images created by the media. The NASA engineers that sent men to the moon and brought them home safely were able to make the best technical choices in an era where their choices were accepted because engineers had the respect of their peers, of the politicians that funded them, and ultimately of the American public. If you go back and read newspapers from the 1960s you don't see engineers referred to as nerds or geeks or any other derogatory terms.

[Quoted] I agree with you that those that control the media have very little understanding or appreciation for what we do. But, whose fault is that? It's [Quoted] our fault. We haven't told them.

A very useful feature of the media is that it is very malleable. Those in the media are constantly checking to see which way the wind is blowing and then running to get in front of the parade. For every letter they receive they figure that there are hundreds of people that have the same idea but haven't [Quoted] taken the time to write. If a journalist got two or three negative letters every time he referred to us in derogatory terms, he would soon stop.

With a relatively small effort on the part of just a few of us we could significantly increase the ability of engineers to get the authority they need to see that things are designed properly.

Now, THAT's a contribution to the betterment of society and the human condition.

Regards,
Brad McMillan

Eli Lilly and Company wrote:

> First. Not that it matters, but as a geek (sometimes refered to as
> geek-asaurus-rex, or cybergod or whatever the vogue non-pc-phrase for the
> engineers is that week), I would like to point out that one primary reason
> "engineers" are not consulted as often as might be optimal, is because
> $$$$$$$$. Engineers are a prideful lot. We actually expect to be paid for
> our trouble. Show me a cheap engineer and I'll show you a sloppy project.
>
> Second. Get a thicker skin. Or get a raise. Whine all the way to the
> bank. Carpe Punicea!
>
> Third: Bottom line there is if you want respect from the press and media,
> you will probably be disappointed. We have a great deal to contribute to
> the betterment of society and the human condition, they know it, and we
> know it. They just don't get it when we explain it, and don't believe it
> when they get it. Add to their low order of chemical-electrical activity,
> that the media are out for excitement, not the tedium of good, solid
> engineering. You and I may know who engineered gyroscopic navigation, but
> the media would have to look up "navigation" in the dictionary so they
> could spell it properly, nevermind about the gyroscope part. Thus the
> media, disadvantaged as they are from lesser genetic materials, rely on
> their only means of defense, sarcasm and ridicule, the last refuge of the
> weaker mind. Or to put it another way. We can write sarcastic articles on
> the state of the polical malaise of the middle class. Can the media design
> a three tiered web application that allows remote access to secure
> publishing tools from Kabul? I think not. We can comment on the return of
> Michael Jordan and its implications to a world wide entertainment
> extraveganza where mindless men run back and forth in their underwear to
> the screams and delights of the rich fools who pay the extortion money for
> the priviledge of watching such displays with painted faces and drunken
> companions. I'm betting that not a single one of the media would have the
> foggiest clue on what kind of communications network, hardware, security
> and protocols would be necessary in order to ensure that a airliner being
> operated from the control tower is not at risk for an unauthorised person
> to hijack a plane by remote control. To you and I this is engineering. To
> the media it is star trek. I vote for leaving the media to wallow in their
> own ignorance. They are meerly commentary on a world they do not
> understand.
>
> Finally: This is not unique. It is also not a point in time when the
> media will change their attitudes or perspectives on geekdom or anything
> else. The media are lazy hounds. Why did the pentagon have to squash a
> leak of classified information? Because the media is not smart enough to
> understand what is classified, what is misinformation and what is just
> plain dangerous. It was an easy story. It landed in their laps. Geeks
> are easy targets. So why do you care? I guarantee that when the time
> comes and the leader of the free world has defined the goal of removing the
> plague of terrorism, he will want sophisticated hardware to go after the
> cowards. The media, in the meantime, will have moved on to next rap
> singer's rap sheet. Who will the Joint Chiefs call in for cool toys to
> sneak up on the bad guys? The New York Times? CNBC? I think not. A
> satellite dish may get you the scores of all the games. But the satellites
> that can guide a tomahak missle to a laser tagged target from 1000 miles
> out and miss the recon marines with infared night vision helmets and uplink
> securelines, now there's a toy. Let's just remember who fights the wars,
> who arms the warriors and who sings the songs. Terrorists don't pay much
> attention to songs.
>
> Russell
Received on Fri Oct 12 2001 - 02:15:02 CEST