Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah I think this is fair enough after reading it back. However, that was not exactly my intention here, and I think this is a case of me needing to be more careful in my wording.

When I said that software engineers add in the speed and reliability, I didn't mean they _only_ add in the speed and reliability: just that these two tenants of good software engineering where accounted for in this "correct" way of doing things (as opposed to the state of most genomics software that I described above).

However, I can see how my phrasing can give the wrong impression about the contributions an engineer makes when the biologist and engineer sit down to do create the real thing together. In a positive environment, both sides (biologists and software engineers) share enough information with one another that the either can make contributions to the scientific/software engineering domain.



software engineer provides/developes the appropriate level of abstraction for the non-software engineer to make use of.

Which if there's no standard for field, and working outside of a given field, makes writing grant(s) without paring up with someone who can develop field standards to be included in grant necessary. Hard to find/compete for scarce applicants using limited resources.

aka startups vs. big company funding for pure research lab (bell labs, xero parc, etc)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: