Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 258 posts

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#181

Post by anigbrowl »

dnautics wrote: post #154
anigbrowl wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because you're lifting it out of the relevant context. He has already messed things up for them by previously claiming to be an engineer to government agencies and local and national media. He can't unring that bell because he already accepted a warning (absent any fine or penalty) and agreed to abide by the Code on not calling himself an engineer and then repeatedly broke that agreement, so he doesn't get to…

If I'm not mistaken, he is an engineer, and even a licensed one too, just not licensed in the Oregonian jurisdiction.

No he isn't! Why do you keep asserting this falsehood?

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#182

Post by dragonwriter »

derefr wrote: post #121
dragonwriter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By sending such a letter, I'm not claiming to be a lawyer, right? Wrong. The author of the letter (you) is falsely claiming to be a lawyer. You are also falsely claiming other things, which may or may not have additional consequences.

I don't see how. I'm not falsely claiming that I'm a lawyer. I'm falsely claiming that someone else is a lawyer—a fictional person. (I write claims in the voices of fictional people all the time; I'm a novelist.) Is it because I would presumably be writing the letter with a first-person-viewpoint prose style? If so, then would it change anything if I just wrote a letter as myself , saying that I would contact my name…

You are writing a letter that purports to be written by a lawyer; you are pretending to be a lawyer that happens to have a different name than your actual name. That is both pretending to be a lawyer, and pretending other false things.

Consider if you change the communication medium from written to oral: if walk up to someone and claim a different name than is actually yours, claim to be a lawyer representing someone else (who you identify with your actual name), and then issue some demands, etc., it's pretty clear that you are claiming to be a lawyer. Changing the medium from oral communication to written doesn't change the essence at all.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#183

Post by [deleted] »

derefr wrote: post #121
dragonwriter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By sending such a letter, I'm not claiming to be a lawyer, right? Wrong. The author of the letter (you) is falsely claiming to be a lawyer. You are also falsely claiming other things, which may or may not have additional consequences.

I don't see how. I'm not falsely claiming that I'm a lawyer. I'm falsely claiming that someone else is a lawyer—a fictional person. (I write claims in the voices of fictional people all the time; I'm a novelist.) Is it because I would presumably be writing the letter with a first-person-viewpoint prose style? If so, then would it change anything if I just wrote a letter as myself , saying that I would contact my name…

[deleted]

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#184

Post by emmelaich »

anigbrowl wrote: post #53
flamedoge wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

government and law trumping math and science. It saddens me.

Nothing got trumped. He would have been fine if he had made the exact same argument with asserting that he was an engineer, a claim that has specific legal implications that are easily verified. If you wrote an article on cardiology, and you said 'I am a doctor' but you hadn't kept your medical license current, then it would be a false claim, regardless of the fact that your article on cardiology was 100% true. Asser…

> ... with asserting that he was an engineer, ...

without?

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#185

Post by anigbrowl »

echion wrote: post #180
dsp1234 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is subject to registration. You are incorrect. See my other post with a link to the clear exceptions baked directly into the law. If what you said were true, then he literally would not have had an affirmative defense to plead at all, which is plainly wrong as the final order specifically notes his pleading of 2 affirmative defenses. You can find these analysis of those affirmative defenses by reviewing the sections…

Paragraph 14[0] clearly states violations as a consequence of ORS 672.007(1)(c)[1] using the definition in ORS 672.005(1)(b)[2]: "by [critiquing an engineering formula] and submitting the critique [...] to members of the public" [...he...] thereby engaged in the practice of engineering [...] specifically, traffic engineering [...and thus] violated ORS 672.020(1), 672.045(1) and OAR 820-010-0730(3)(c)". I agree his af…

But your argument only makes sense if we forget about the fact that he knowingly made a false claim to be 'an engineer' after the inappropriateness of that had been explained to him.

You could be right if that false claim hadn't happened. But it did, and everything subsequent has to be evaluated within that context. Think of the difference between global and local variables, and the sort of bugs you get if you ignore scope rules (I'm guessing you're a coder, ignore if that's not the case).

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#186

Post by takk309 »

fsloth wrote: post #141
takk309 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Professional licensing exists to protect the public at large from fraud. Would you want a public building, say a sports stadium, designed by someone without the proper training? Engineering licenses add a layer of protection and assurance that the person performing the work is truly capable of performing the work.

I think you need to think of a better example. The stadium would be built by a major contractor, and they would be responsible for hiring capable people. In general, having a university degree in structural engineering means a person can design structures that don't fall down. In this instance, having a license would be just like an extra stamp on the university degree.

The contractor would be hired to build what the engineer designed. The contractor does not check the designs.

The university degree is only the first step toward becoming an engineer. In the US, to be a licensed engineer one must have a degree, pass the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, work a cumulative 4 years under another professional engineer, and then pass the Professional Engineering exam for the discipline they wish to pursue. After that, continuing education credits are require to maintain the license. Additional testing may be needed depending on field and location. To say that the license is just a stamp on the degree is not correct.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#187

Post by cholantesh »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #120
cholantesh wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've considered getting my P.Eng. once I complete my degree; do you feel that it's a worthwhile credential to have? Every P.Eng. that I've met has been involved in mechanical or electrical engineering, so I'd like to get the perspective of someone in software.

In the US it's only of use in industries where life safety is important (you have to sign off on potentially harmful technology) or to serve as an expert witness in court. Getting one generally requires at least one existing PE who can vouch for the quality of your work which creates a chicken and egg problem if there are no PEs where you work.

Thanks; this was my suspicion, too. The other PEs I've spoken to were bewildered that I'd consider it, given that they needed it basically to get managerial/senior engineering positions on public sector projects.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#188

Post by glitch003 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #169
memracom wrote: post #153

When they told him that changing an engineered ITE formula constitutes the practice of engineering without a licence, he should have claimed that he was a performance artist and his letters should be considered a comedic performance designed to draw public attention to the court jesters who claim to be engineers but came up with the flawed ITE formula which even a performance artist can find flaws with. That would be…

Why not just be honest from the outset?

Because that gets you fined :-P

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#189

Post by cholantesh »

slavik81 wrote: post #63
cholantesh wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've considered getting my P.Eng. once I complete my degree; do you feel that it's a worthwhile credential to have? Every P.Eng. that I've met has been involved in mechanical or electrical engineering, so I'd like to get the perspective of someone in software.

I've never used it, as I quit my job and went into grad school about the time I got it. There are possible career benefits, though they're not huge. The company I left was just starting to require a software engineer on every team to sign off on each release. And, my father convinced me to do the paperwork for the P.Eng. with a story of a raise he missed out on due to not bothering with the P.Eng. despite holding an…

Thanks for the perspective; seems like, in the aggregate, it's not really worth it for professionals in our line of work. :/

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#190

Post by sillysaurus3 »

echion wrote: post #175
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offtopic, but I just wanted to point out that your comment looks like this: http://imgur.com/FGi9jsv It's quite difficult to read, and even harder for mobile users. It might be better to use > or asterisks for quoting. For anyone else who was trying to read the quoted parts, here they are: He's perfectly at liberty to [share the information] No, he's not according to the violations cited in Final Order, page 6, secti…

Thanks -- I did use '>' but didn't wrap the lines myself, assuming the single '> lots of text here' was enough.

I think I figured out what happened. It looks like the source you were copying from was indented with five or six spaces. HN interprets two leading spaces as "code formatting," which turns off line wrapping.
Post reply on HN