Skip to main content

Programmer

Recently, I joined a new company called CloudFlare where I was asked to pick a job title. I decided to go with Programmer. It was the first job title I ever had:

(Notice how at my first job there was no email address, but there was one for Telex.)

I choose Programmer for both its simplicity and accuracy. I am working as a programmer helping to speed up and protect web sites, and other programming-related job titles seem overblown. Software Engineer always seems like an overly grand way of saying the same thing. And I'm certainly not a Computer Scientist.

Fundamentally, I make computers do what I want them to do.

Of course, people like to come up with grand titles. I once had the stupid title of Chief Architect. And there's a whole variety of Lead Engineer, Principal Engineer, etc. This is partly done so that in large companies people of different seniorities are distinguished and partly so that people feel important.

It might seem lowly to be a Programmer, but in a world where so much is driven by computers there's nothing shameful in being the person who makes them go.

Comments

be_slayed said…
That's cool that you joined CloudFlare - congrats on the new job. (I recently started using them.)
martijn said…
Congrats on the new job!

And kudos to CloudFlare for allowing you you to call yourself what you really are.
Anonymous said…
Thank you for (once again) redefining «programmer».
Titles are daft.
Hope you enjoy making the CloudFlare servers hum. Congrats.
mikej said…
You might like the short editorial I wrote for a now defunct paper magazine called Visual Systems Journal which I "reprinted" on I Programmer
http://www.i-programmer.info/professional-programmer/i-programmer/27-i-programmer.html

I agree with you but when we ran a poll
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/88-site/2059-february-poll-results.html
Programmer only just beat Developer
Unknown said…
I’m sure years ago I heard that Ken Thompson, then still at Bell Labs, had “Coder” as his passport occupation.

Popular posts from this blog

Your last name contains invalid characters

My last name is "Graham-Cumming". But here's a typical form response when I enter it:


Does the web site have any idea how rude it is to claim that my last name contains invalid characters? Clearly not. What they actually meant is: our web site will not accept that hyphen in your last name. But do they say that? No, of course not. They decide to shove in my face the claim that there's something wrong with my name.

There's nothing wrong with my name, just as there's nothing wrong with someone whose first name is Jean-Marie, or someone whose last name is O'Reilly.

What is wrong is that way this is being handled. If the system can't cope with non-letters and spaces it needs to say that. How about the following error message:

Our system is unable to process last names that contain non-letters, please replace them with spaces.

Don't blame me for having a last name that your system doesn't like, whose fault is that? Saying "Your last name …

All the symmetrical watch faces (and code to generate them)

If you ever look at pictures of clocks and watches in advertising they are set to roughly 10:10 which is meant to be the most attractive (smiling!) position for the hands. They are actually set to 10:09.14 if the hands are truly symmetrical. CC BY 2.0image by Shinji
I wanted to know what all the possible symmetrical watch faces are and so I wrote some code using Processing. Here's the output (there's one watch face missing, 00:00 or 12:00, because it's very boring):



The key to writing this is to figure out the relationship between the hour and minute hands when the watch face is symmetrical. In an hour the minute hand moves through 360° and the hour hand moves through 30° (12 hours are shown on the watch face and 360/12 = 30).
The core loop inside the program is this:   for (int h = 0; h <= 12; h++) {
    float m = (360-30*float(h))*2/13;
    int s = round(60*(m-floor(m)));
    int col = h%6;
    int row = floor(h/6);
    draw_clock((r+f)*(2*col+1), (r+f)*(row*2+1), r, h, floor(m…

The Elevator Button Problem

User interface design is hard. It's hard because people perceive apparently simple things very differently. For example, take a look at this interface to an elevator:


From flickr

Now imagine the following situation. You are on the third floor of this building and you wish to go to the tenth. The elevator is on the fifth floor and there's an indicator that tells you where it is. Which button do you press?

Most people probably say: "press up" since they want to go up. Not long ago I watched someone do the opposite and questioned them about their behavior. They said: "well the elevator is on the fifth floor and I am on the third, so I want it to come down to me".

Much can be learnt about the design of user interfaces by considering this, apparently, simple interface. If you think about the elevator button problem you'll find that something so simple has hidden depths. How do people learn about elevator calling? What's the right amount of informati…