@nuko @icst to me, someone with nowhere near the intelligence in computer "science" as these posts, I see software "engineering" never really taking off because a lot of so called engineers are still in the "move fast and break things" mentality (see: the All In podcast if you want to tear your ears off) which is fine when you're working on reinventing the bus or a public park for VC money, but works terribly when there are actual rules that need to be in place, especially dealing with people's wellbeing or immutable things like *the laws of physics*.
Correctness is usually taken for granted in software because for many software cases as long as A does B everything in between doesn't really matter, which cannot be said for something as complex as a skyscraper or an aeroplane. That's also why there are so many rules, regulations and inspections (one could argue especially with buildings there are too many but this is beyond the scope of this post): because something made incorrect _will kill people_, something usually seen as being bad.
To get a little political the culmination of the software "breaking things is ok actually as long as it gets fixed" mentality is all of the shit that got yanked by DOGE during the ketamine binges in DC. What exactly are all of the after effects caused by flushing USAID or the CFPB down the toilet? No one will know for a long while because governments are, by design, **slow as shit**. Was it smart to fire people doing actually useful things if you can just rehire them? If they're supremely talented, they probably already found a better job doing something else for more and you just lost someone important. Was it smart to immediately yank the funding of every single NIH study because it had a word that could be tangentially related to DEI instead of painstakingly going through each study and actually getting rid of the DEI ones? (opinions on DEI are irrelevant) Probably not, some studies can't just be arbitrarily started and stopped because someone running grep said so.