Hacker News Reader

We check the output of engineers tjats what infra audits and certs are for. We basically tell industry if you want to waste your money on poor engineers whose output doesn’t certify go ahead.

you could do that with civil engineering. anyone gets to design bridges. bridge is done we inspect, sorry x isn’t redundant your engineering is bad tear it down.

View on HN

You couldn't do that with civil engineering, because checking if a bridge was built correctly is actually really hard, and it's why it's such a process for engineers to sign off on phases of construction.

You could look at the blueprints and calcs that were used to build it and inspect it, which they do. There’s no fundamental difference. Firms will self enforce engineering rigor because it’s a waste of money not to. Making it more stringent when lives are at stake makes sense, thats the only reason you could use to separate them. Also that can even get blurry in eg avionics software.

Looking at blueprints will not tell you if a bridge was built correctly. It will tell you if a bridge could have been built correctly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com