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

211–220 of 258 posts

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

#211

Post by anigbrowl »

exabrial wrote: post #177
anigbrowl wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize this all started when Jarlstrom contacted the board to request that they launch an investigation of the city where his wife had received a traffic ticket? 'The board shouldn't exist' is a novel proposition. I guess you can't understand what interest the state might have in the ability to commission accurate land surveys and reliable public works. Almost makes you wonder how these things come into being in…

You seem to be asserting the government is the only institution wholely capable of, is effective at, or even interested in verifying a person's credentials.

You seem to projecting some of your political stereotypes onto me. The Board in question is in fact semi-autonomous and self-funding and has been for nearly 20 years.

Insofar as government is a provider of public goods in the form of infrastructure I would certainly say that it has a legitimate interest in maintaining standards so as to avoid wasting public money.

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

#212

Post by muninn_ »

anigbrowl wrote: post #209
muninn_ wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was quoting OP's link and not providing legal analysis - just demonstrating faulty reasoning provided by OP. Meanwhile I'll keep on being an engineer all the live long day :)

There's no achievement in pointing out 'faulty reasoning' when the OP explicitly stated that it was a simplification. You just complicated it again to feel like you had a point.

Where did I say it was an achievement? Was the OP an achievement? The simplification was inherently incorrect, and contradictory. To say that I "feel" that I had a point is nonsense. There's no "feeling" here, it's simply a stated factual point. All you have to do is search for "mechanical engineer" or something along those lines.

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

#213

Post by anigbrowl »

mschuster91 wrote: post #105

Nothing new in legal terms, claiming regulated titles is a crime or offense in a lot of jurisdictions - including Germany (§132a StGB, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missbrauch_von_Titeln,_Berufsb... ). Unrelated to the legal issues, what the engineering board is doing seems to be beyond ridiculous. IMHO Mr. Järlström should have informed himself better about the implications of the word "engineer"... but you know…

Three felonies a day isn't an old saying, it's a buzzword pushed by an attorney who makes a living from telling highly exaggerated stories about overbearing government that don't stand up under scrutiny. Have a read of the documents in this case and notice how the engineering board courteously informed Jarlstrom of his error without any fines or penalties, only for him to turn around and repeat the behavior he had been warned against.

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

#214

Post by account1984 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #210
account1984 wrote: post #80

I am frankly both surprised and unsurprised at the same time with the comments from those supportive of government regulation of software engineering. If your a hack who didn't learn to program until you went to school, I suppose I understand, you want to limit those entering your field to those who paid the same to play. However, how about all of those who are likely far smarter than you and learned to program as ch…

Literally nobody is making that argument, but have a good day.

A few moments of reviewing your comment history in this thread indicates that you are not far from inferring a general complacency with the state of affairs - and it's okay, you aren't alone in this thread.

However, that is the problem - people shouldn't be pushed around by bureaucratic functionaries because he hasn't paid the cover charge to use the title that is appropriate for his trade. He was sending an intelligible email with genuine, well researched claims - he was disrespected, fined and suppressed.

I wonder how many emails Oregon is receiving now from engineers?

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

#215

Post by anigbrowl »

muninn_ wrote: post #212
anigbrowl wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no achievement in pointing out 'faulty reasoning' when the OP explicitly stated that it was a simplification. You just complicated it again to feel like you had a point.

Where did I say it was an achievement? Was the OP an achievement? The simplification was inherently incorrect, and contradictory. To say that I "feel" that I had a point is nonsense. There's no "feeling" here, it's simply a stated factual point. All you have to do is search for "mechanical engineer" or something along those lines.

A narrow pedantry rarely leads to insight. The basic point that 'engineer' is a restricted title in many jurisdictions and contexts is sound, notwithstanding your emotional aversion to it. This has been explained through the thread at length, often by people more eloquent than I.

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

#216

Post by anigbrowl »

account1984 wrote: post #214
anigbrowl wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally nobody is making that argument, but have a good day.

A few moments of reviewing your comment history in this thread indicates that you are not far from inferring a general complacency with the state of affairs - and it's okay, you aren't alone in this thread. However, that is the problem - people shouldn't be pushed around by bureaucratic functionaries because he hasn't paid the cover charge to use the title that is appropriate for his trade. He was sending an intellig…

I suggest you spend more than a few moments on it as my arguments seem to have sailed completely over your head.

Did you read any of the primary source documents in the article? If not then this is going to be a waste of time. If so, please reconcile your arguments with the fact that Jarlstrom initiated contact with the board in an attempt to push a city authority around, and then broke the agreement he made to abide by Oregon's code when it was explained to him absent any kind of bureaucratic sanction.

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

#217

Post by lacampbell »

sidlls wrote: post #147
lacampbell wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For you, what's the distinction between being a software engineer, and being a software developer? The line seems blurry to me.

I'm not Canadian, but a long time ago, before graduate school, I was on an engineering track. Most of my friends joined my path (physics) but several went on to advanced degrees in engineering, accreditation/licensing, etc. When I describe to them what "engineering" is like in this industry they snicker and guffaw. The two fields are quite far apart. Mainly this is because software "engineering" is still quite immatu…

When I describe to them what "engineering" is like in this industry they snicker and guffaw. The two fields are quite far apart. Mainly this is because software "engineering" is still quite immature. "Real" engineering has been something humans have worked on for literally millennia, so in this sense it's hardly a fair comparison.

That's my underlying feeling as well. Software Engineering seems like a futuristic discipline, like being a Nanobot Technologist. We're just not there yet - why bother pretending?

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

#218

Post by wutbrodo »

jpambrun wrote: post #148
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually do. Doctors with "proper training" still kill people and are grossly negligent. Like I replied to someone above, where I think I and you would sharply disagree on is the notion that without mandated professional licensing it would be a free for all. I don't think that is true at all. I think systems of accreditation, checking for competency, etc. would emerge, and likely even be better than the ones we hav…

It's not enough. I have a bachelor's degree and Ph.D. in Engineering, but I still cannot call myself either engineer (I'm not a member of the Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec) nor Doctor. And it is fine. Professional orders can disbar you temporally and impose training for any competence or ethical shortcoming. Their role is solely to protect the public. This is the 'systems of accreditation, checking for competency' t…

> Most Doctors are not grossly negligent, but if you find one that is what are you gonna do? There is no one to complain to without professional orders.

Um, the legal system? Have you honestly never heard of the legal concept of malpractice? "Gross negligence" is very much included in it.

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

#219

Post by anigbrowl »

tynpeddler wrote: post #208
anigbrowl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop ignoring the context in which the violation occurred. You are treating them as two separate behaviors when one is in fact pendant on the other. I've seen this in so many legal cases - people file appeals arguing that the law is terribly wrong and their arguments are beautifully logical but for the fact that they are asking the appeal court to forget some very salient fact. Imagine you go to a party and pee in th…

The final court document does not seem to conform to your argument. Section 13 for example, does conform to your points. It states that "By purporting to be able to perform engineering services or work, Jarlstrom engaged in the practice of engineering...". However, section 14 is very different. It does not rely on his use of the title of engineer. Instead it states "By reviewing, critiquing, and altering an engineere…

For the last time, these are not separate issues and treating them as such is erroneous. Section 13 establishes the context in which the facts in section 14 were evaluated.

I'm exhausted trying to explain this and frankly annoyed that I've wasted most of my afternoon trying to provide legal insight to people who refuse to listen to reason that contradicts their preconceptions.

WHY do you think section 14 should be interpreted in isolation from section 13? Do you think that makes it like a new function or procedure in which all the scope rules are reset? Why are you ignoring 672.007?

It's really frustrating that programmers seem to think that working with logical constructs makes them lawyers. Maybe you would take me more seriously if I charged you $250/hour?

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

#220

Post by miiiiiike »

jnbiche wrote: post #68
miiiiiike wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went through an ABET accredited software engineering program, they pointed us to the NSPE. I'm not a PE but I still call myself a software engineer on everything except government forms. As far as the government's concerned I'm a programmer.

The NCEES absolutely offers a PE exam in the US for software engineers, for about 5 years now [1]. Most states offer PE licenses now in software engineering. 1. (note the "software" in the list of exams offered) http://ncees.org/engineering/pe/

Thanks! I went through ~8 years ago when there weren't any SE focused licenses. Hadn't heard that anything had changed. Will take a run at this if it isn't too expensive.
Post reply on HN