[michaelteter]

Take away the software, and how do the professional engineers work? No CAD. No structural analysis. No fluid dynamics simulations.

I think that's a bit harder to replace than it is to clean a dirty toilet. Presumably the professional engineers can clean their own toilet if absolutely necessary.

[Nicksil]

>Take away the software, and how do the professional engineers work? No CAD. No structural analysis. No fluid dynamics simulations.

Engineering was a thing before software.

[michaelteter]

Is engineering the same now as it was before software? No. It is utterly dependent upon software now. That is my point.

The group that wants to protect or maintain ownership of the word "engineer" is dependent upon the people whom it objects to also using that title.

[Nicksil]

>Is engineering the same now as it was before software?

The core concepts which make engineering engineering? Yeah.

>The group that wants to protect or maintain ownership of the word "engineer" is dependent upon the people whom it objects to also using that title.

They are as dependent on software as any other institution, on a day-to-day basis, which have transitioned to computerized automation over the last ~60 years. Software aids efficiency.

The argument that engineers are incapable of designing and constructing sound solutions without software is unsound.

[michaelteter]

> The argument that engineers are incapable of designing and constructing sound solutions without software is unsound.

Name one modern feat of engineering which could be done without the aid of software.

Commercial airliner? Nope. Modern skyscraper? Nope. Modern CPU? Nope.

Modern bridge? Maybe; but without structural analysis and stress simulations, it's going to use more material and be rated lower.

I'm done arguiung. It's clear that there's always some meritless retort waiting.