On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:55, Josh Smift <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, I have no idea what exactly a modern stone mason does. Carve > stone? Build it into walls? Design buildings made of stone? Could be all > kinds of things. I understand that it involves working with rocks, but I > couldn't tell you what specific activities a stone mason does with those > rocks all day every day.
Josh, et al., (PLEASE NOTE: I have recently been accused [though not by anyone in LOPSA] of continuing an argument just with the goal of being "right". While I do not believe that accusation was justified, I feel the need to qualify this. Being "right" or "wrong" is not the purpose for expressing my disagreement. I am only wishing to better express my opinion on this matter.) I won't argue for or against whether there is an visibility/identity problem for system administrators. I will only say that there is a contingent of our membership that believes there is a problem, and even if we don't all agree that there is a problem, as an organization I believe we still need to acknowledge that a contingent of our membership has that concern, and consider whether there is a way to address that concern, given the capabilities and resources at our disposal. I will, however, disagree with your statement that you have no idea what a stone mason does.[1] And I believe your questions, above, actually illustrate my point. You may not know exactly what that _particular_ stone mason does. However, you have already delineated three specific examples of what he _might_ do. At the same time, you have implied countless possible examples of what a stone mason does _not_ do. Does a stone mason serve delicious treats to customers at a fast-food restaurant? (Don't split hairs! Yes, a stone mason between jobs might do this. But in that role, that person is _not_ a stone mason.) Also, you said "I understand it involves working with rocks...". Think about what that means. You and I have held rocks. We know that rocks have very specific properties. We know that rocks also have considerable variation in those properties. Some are hard. Some are crumbly. Some are shiny. We also know rocks when we see and touch them. Even as a layperson examining a masonry structure...be it a wall, a fire pit, a driveway or whatever...if there is a rock in it, we can _see_ it. We know, "Hey! That's a rock!". We can look at that structure and see how the rocks fit in with the whole. Maybe there's mortar. Maybe there's no mortar. You can make one or more guesses about what was involved to bind those rocks together into that configuration. You may not know the specifics of how to do it...or especially how to do it _correctly_. But just from normal experiences in the natural world, and from peripheral experiences of being in proximity to construction sites or similar environments. You can fill in quite a few details, however vague, of what tasks might have been necessary to construct that masonry structure, starting from rocks. Now, has a layperson ever held a "computer system" in their hand? (And no, I am not intending to be glib or sarcastic.) If you ask them precisely that question, they will probably say yes. But are both of you talking about the same thing when you say "computer system"? If you both start listing off the properties or characteristics of your "computer systems", will your lists match? Will the combination of those characteristics describe either of these individual examples of "computer systems"? And yet, if both of you are holding rocks, you're probably going to already be talking about the same thing. And you will probably come up with a compatible list of properties/characteristics that applies to both examples of rocks. If a layperson pulls up a web page in their browser, can they see the basic building blocks of the system that provided them that capability? Can they extrapolate any details of what tasks might have been involved to allow that web page to get to their computer? Most of the "computer system" is hidden from them. They have no concept of its degree (or lack) of complexity, of its size nor of its interdependency on other systems. And as far as telling programmers, web designers, and sysadmins apart: The majority of laypersons (laity?), now, has had a basic programming introduction in high school or college. Programming has also been popularized...albeit superficially...in movies and news media. With the advent of WYSIWYG HTML editors and GUI and/or web based site-building apps..._everyone_ thinks they have an idea of what is encompassed by "web design". They may not be completely right...but they still know that people they put in the "web designer" bucket are not the same as those they put in the "programmer" bucket. Sure, there may be overlap...but they aren't the same. How many laypersons have had a system administration class in high school or college? How many movies or books feature a system administrator? Or even if they do...perhaps by accident...do they actually label that character as a system administrator? The only sysadmin/desktop support example I can immediately recall is a very BAD example in an SNL skit. (And he wasn't very flattering.) [1] Yes, I left out the word "exactly". I don't think anyone expects a layperson to know exactly what a system administrator might do. But I believe the concern (mine at least) is that a layperson doesn't even have a general idea of what might be encompassed within "system administration". _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
