@betajet: Given the way I've seen a lot of software developed over the decades, I think I'll go with "Hackery".
I like it -- good one -- this blog was originally about names for groups of silicon chips -- but based on your input I'm thinking about doing a follow up column on names for different engineering professionals.
So what groups of engineering professionals spring to mind. You've already covered software developers and logic designers, how about Embedded Designers, Civil Engineers, Mechanical Designers, System Architects, Verification Engineers... Can you think of any more?
Note that I'm not asking for collective nouns for these folks at this stage (that will be the purposes of the follow-up column) -- I'm just looking for different types of engineers...
My favorite digital design spoonerism is from logic testing: the stuck fault. I once heard someone mis-speak that one before a large IBM audience. For this reason, a lot of test theory guys prefer the term stuck-at fault because it's a lot safer to say.
Given the way I've seen a lot of software developed over the decades, I think I'll go with "Hackery". "Sillygism" is related to the kind of logical thinking I tend to associate more with digital design.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.