November 7, 2025
Engineering or just vibes?
Is Software the UFOlogy of Engineering Disciplines?
Coders brawl over: real engineers or just clever builders
TLDR: The article argues software often runs on belief and anecdotes rather than hard evidence, much like UFO lore. Commenters clash: some say coding is craft, others say it’s not even recognized as engineering, and a few claim it’s neither science nor engineering—just powerful tools in anyone’s hands.
A spicy essay compares software’s loose “proof” culture to UFO hunting: lots of dramatic testimony, not much hard evidence. Cue comment war. One camp, led by Zigurd, yells: it’s craft, math included, like woodworking but with algorithms. Another, pbarry25, goes full reality check: many governments don’t even license software as engineering, so maybe we’re not engineers at all. Then Marshferm drops a philosophy grenade—software is a “hallucination,” neither engineering nor science—sending the thread into Matrix memes and “is code just vibes?” jokes.
The article’s UFO angle—witnesses, hearings, and no lab-proof—mirrors complaints about software’s standards: opinion-heavy, evidence-light. Skeptics cite AARO and NASA as “show me data or it didn’t happen,” just like code claims without tests. Almondsetat argues software blurs engineer vs non-engineer because powerful tools are cheap and everywhere; unlike building a bridge, you can ship an app from your couch. giantg2 adds a gut-punch: most coding is just building, not engineering—think custom bike shop vs factory R&D.
Jokes flew: “UFO = Unfinished Feature Object,” “aliens write better unit tests,” and “witness testimony ≠ documentation.” Drama rating: high. Outcome: no consensus, just a meme-fueled showdown over whether coding is science, craft, or chaos—minus the flying saucers.
Key Points
- •The article contrasts software’s evidence standards with other engineering fields using UAP investigations as an example.
- •It recounts the July 2023 U.S. congressional hearings and David Grusch’s claims of captured non-human craft and materials.
- •Scientists in DoD’s AARO and NASA’s UAP working group reject witness testimony as proof and report no hard evidence supporting alien claims.
- •NASA’s group says the military has withheld data, but secrecy is not evidence of extraterrestrial technology; military-confirmed videos show anomalies without extraordinary maneuvers.
- •Official studies from the U.S., France, and the U.K. (including Project Condign) conclude UAP are real but unidentified and warrant further study, though research is career-risky.