I'm happy to agree that the terms have some fuzziness and that they're frequently misused, but no, words do still mean things.

>words do still mean things.

They don't if there's no consensus

And I'm sure you ain't got the authority needed to affirm that those definitions are commonly used in those ways

The point is that your comment adds absolutely nothing of value to the discussion. You’re a CO2 leak.

Someone commented on an article about what is vs isn’t in terms of names for writing computer programs, at least by title alone, and the galaxy brain contribution you’ve got is “it doesn’t matter”, bitching that they didn’t give a reason why it matters yet you can’t offer anything to back your shit take up either. Delete your comment lol.

There's no need to be rude.

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

you're all going to upset the actual professional engineers

It seems to me that a key requirement for engineering would be that there are formal design specifications for the system (such as a car or bridge) as well as its constituent components. There are also usually mathematical models of the system that can predict its behavior and performance as accurately as needed for the application.

Many modern software systems seem to lack such specifications or models. In these cases software development seems more like tinkering than engineering.