Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Sep 2012 15:07 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Thread beginning with comment 536303
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-03-02
As he says in the original article, these are points on a spectrum (or maybe in a space), but I definitely see people falling into these categories, and when they respect eachother's talents, they make good teams. I myself, I think, have fallen cleanly at various times into the Engineer and Scientist roles, but not Developer, because I reinvent too many of my own solutions. When I worked as an engineer (over 15 years now), people have called me a scientist, but if you go by this guy's definition, I've been more of an engineer. While working on my doctorate, I found my engineering skills to be immensely useful, but I would struggle from time to time with some of the more esoteric theory. I like theory, and I've done plenty of my own science, but I spend more time using my implementation skills than developing new theory. Even in teaching class, I put a lot of emphasis on the ways that the various theoretical concepts have been implemented in the past.