[powerhugs]

Engineering isn't about working on the most interesting problems. It's about getting stuff done and management happy.

Here, parent explained in detail how to get stuff done, management very happy and secure their position for years to come.

[no_wizard]

> Engineering isn't about working on the most interesting problems. It's about getting stuff done and management happy

Truth is harsh, however this seems to be 100% accurate for nearly all cases of employment. Rarely do you get to focus on simply interesting problems and good engineering as a primary concern

[philipov]

Boredom is in the mind, not the task. Things aren't boring, people are. An important type of intelligence is the capacity to find what's interesting about a task that others lack the imagination to see. One needs to be able to create their own interesting solutions rather than expecting them to be handed down on a plate.

[chasd00]

> find what's interesting about a task that others lack the imagination to see.

word of warning from an old guy, don't create problems for yourself when you don't have to. Turning something boring into something interesting can have painful consequences down the road.

[schmorptron]

How?

[johnnyanmac]

Boredom is lacking stimulation. Even the most cutting edge task can grow boring if you need to plumb with it dozens of times over a year. Just because you can find what's unique doesn't mean it stimulates you. That's the exact issue with why neuro divergent individuals are demonize: they don't take as much interest with people as "normal people" would.

>One needs to be able to create their own interesting solutions rather than expecting them to be handed down on a plate.

You should tell that to every old manager I had.

[philipov]

> You should tell that to every old manager I had.

They sound like boreful people. If you find you have become boreful, there's a good chance you may be experiencing burnout or depression, which are nasty diseases, but still ones that afflict the subject, not the object. Nothing is boring but for the person who perceives it that way.

[johnnyanmac]

>They sound like boreful people.

They have a job and family at the end of the day too. Not everyone has the power nor passion to try and and move a billion dollar corporation to care for people over profit.

>If you find you have become boreful, there's a good chance you may be experiencing burnout or depression,

I haven't has a full time job in over 18 months, so I hope I'm not burnt out.

>Nothing is boring but for the person who perceives it that way.

That's like saying nothing is ugly except for what people think is ugly. Boredom is personal and shaped by each person's experience, so I don't think framing it as a person for not trying hard enough is going to go too far in practice (nor is it productive to judge people based on how they prioritize their lives). Of course some things will be boring to one person and a life passion for another.We don't have enough time nor energy to try and find appreciation for every object and concept on Earth.

[insamniac]

you should be a production line manager.

[philipov]

Is this why I love Factorio so much?

[auahzbxkfkx]

I’ve got some mulch in my yard that needs counting.

[majkinetor]

Everything in this comment is gold.

[tasuki]

> Things aren't boring, people are.

What a strange thing to say! Aren't people also kind of... things? Shouldn't they be at least as interesting as things?

[johnnyanmac]

You gotta go into R&D if you want to focus on the fun stuff without the annoying plumbing. But such positions require an entirely different pipeline from getting a SWE position out of college.

[mytailorisrich]

A good way to secure your position is to be the go-to expert for a product with many years of life ahead of it.

Fixing stuff on a legacy product may make management happy but if that product is discontinued next year then you haven't accrued technical expertise valuable to the company (but you may have built a reputation as a fixer and quick learner).

So, as usual, it is a balancing act.

Edit: this is my perspective from the embedded world. It probably applies generally, though.

[joezydeco]

I'm referring to embedded, not web dev.

When times get tight the new projects get shitcanned and the 10 year-old cash cow design gets the promised new features.

One crusty project I worked on was a legacy control board for a piece of restaurant equipment. The customer, the company that built the actual machine, had been building this product for 40 years. It had been through two PCB redesigns and two different microcontrollers, but the logic was tried and true and had to survive. A port of the project from 6800 assembly to C had completely gone off the rails and the contractor was dumped. All it took was a 20-opcode fix to a routine that the contractor just couldn't grok.

[ambicapter]

It is indeed, but at the same time, things that have stuck around tend to stick around, and hot new things have a way more variable longevity score.

[dakiol]

I wouldn't say that's the conclusion. If there's only one true thing about work is: management doesn't care about you. They can fire you for any reason, and thinking that by working on stuff nobody else wants to work on you are "safe", it's an illusion.

If any the conclusion is: work on what you want, life is short.

[bee_rider]

Engineers have a special place in society like doctors and lawyers. Working with management is part of the job, but engineers have a professional ethical obligation to say no if they are asked to something against the public good.

The split there isn’t in favor of doing stuff that’s fun and novel though; actually, the engineer should usually pick a boring proven solution if the public has a high stake in the outcome.

[Glawen]

Only valid when engineering something which can kill/hurt/pollute. These areas are regulated and can carry personal liabilities when it goes wrong.

But the vast majority of HN topics are not concerned. Additionaly, it does not pay well

[rkangel]

> Engineering isn't about working on the most interesting problems. It's about getting stuff done and management happy.

That's a perfectly reasonable thing to want out of engineering for yourself. I wouldn't state it as an absolute truth for all people though.

Personally, I'd like to be working on something that extends the state-of-the-art a little, even if only by a tiny fraction. It can be one for the other disciplines involved - it doesn't have to be the software I'm writing that is responsible for that (and it usually isn't), but that's what I derive satisfaction from.

[regularfry]

It depends on your goals, though. Depending on the company, that can be a very good way to be treated as a cost centre to be minimised.

[MassiveQuasar]

Yes, let's minimize the only dev working on legacy software.

[SR2Z]

Do you think that software becomes poorly understood and maintained because the company treats it as a prestigious job and rewards people for working on it?

[gecko6]

This is how I got laid off. Working on legacy software, sole person on the team, eventually management decided that it could be replaced by AI or some such pixie dust.

[spiffytech]

Legacy software with a single dev can be on the fast track to getting shut down. If it was still a business priority, they'd be throwing more resources at it.

[ethbr1]

Has said many a manager who thinks developers are fungible.

[scarface_74]

I don’t think the parent comment is saying that should be the case. But the way that corporate culture works, it is definitely a career killer.

[mardifoufs]

That's a very narrow definition of engineering. And while it's not wrong, it's absolutely more of a "management" POV. Like sure, for management, engineering is mostly about what you said, but that's it.

[ErikAugust]

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.