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

Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 325 posts

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#241

Post by takk309 »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #233
notlob wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Titles can be contextual. I do not refer to myself (a PhD) as a doctor in a hospital because others could incorrectly think I was a physician. This problem is especially vexing for nurses with PhDs.

A Medical Doctor must have specific training to not harm their patients. An Engineer designs functional things. No reasonable person is going to think that him calling himself an "Electrical Engineer", which he is, construes that he had specific training in designing traffic infrastructure that doesn't accidentally harm people. Traffic infrastructure is not a nuanced topic full of dangerous pitfalls. He was claiming…

I very much disagree with you. While traffic engineering failures may not be as acute as a medical doctor, the effects can be much more expensive and far reaching. For example, let us say that a road has a design speed of 55 mph. That would dictate the maximum curvature of the horizontal alignment. If an engineer chooses to ignore this design speed and makes the corner too tight, there will likely be a crash cluster at this location. The cost to mitigate that kind of mistake could be very expensive and possibly cost multiple lives.

Another more extreme, yet more common, example is structural engineering. While the basics of structural engineering are relatively simple the consequences of failure are very high. If a multi-story structure collapses, a lot of people will be injured or killed. That is why it is important to know more than just the basics of what goes into structural engineering.

I am not trying to down play the importance of training for medical doctors. I am trying to highlight that engineers need to have training and a regulatory board that is used to track and prove that the training has been completed to an acceptable level. If any yahoo is able to say, "I am an engineer, trust me," how do you prove his credentials? Just like with a medical doctor, you would look up his certification.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#242

Post by cr0sh »

mulmen wrote: post #118
tialaramex wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The yellow light provides a period when drivers know the light is going to go red soon, all else being equal this light should be set to stay on for just long enough for drivers in properly maintained cars, who drive at legal speeds, to see it and all either come to a stop or pass the intersection before the light turns red. Typically formulas care about the allowed speed of cars, the expected braking capability of a…

In the age of big data optimizing for the right value will be our greatest challenge.

The question becomes "what is the right value?"

Is it "optimise for most money and fewest/no crashes"?

Or is it "optimise for fewest accidents"?

I can almost guarantee it will be the first option that is selected.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#243

Post by drewmol »

mikestew wrote: post #228
drewmol wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the states I've lived they have no obligation, but it's incredibly helpful to keeping traffic flowing. Often a +/- 5MPH adjustment can help a whole lot. I know it's not mandatory, but if you are aware of a merging vehicle I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to be bothered to make a minor adjust to ease the process, and often/most times they don't. That's all I was getting at.

I think we're talking past each other while in mostly agreement. The minor adjustments you talk about, I'm happy to make them in any other area of the country. Like I've been saying, if we all co-operate, we all get home sooner. But in the Seattle area it appears that some are not only taking advantage of that co-operation, they now take it to be their right, alleviating all responsibility on their part. I dunno, may…

Seems so. It's been a while since I've been to Seattle, but it sure seems like a PITA based on the comments. I truley detest traffic so Cleveland is pretty nice in that regard, 12 miles from downtown = 12 minutes from downtown in most cases ;-)

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#244

Post by mywittyname »

asteli wrote: post #202
trvlngwlbry wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've felt the same way about "slow as hell left lane campers" for years and thought that maybe — if states never did anything to fix it — there might be a commercial solution to fixing this. The idea I came up with awhile ago was to build a network of motorcyclists willing to attach a sign to the back of their bike, that reads (something like), "You're causing traffic by being in this lane at your speed - please move…

as a motorcyclist, i have another idea get more people to ride motorcycles. an oft-cited study [1] shows that a 10% increase in motorcycle ridership would cut time lost to traffic by 63% 1: http://www.acem.eu/images/stories/doc/pressreleases/2011/PTW...

How much would it increase commuting-related injuries and fatalities though?

Motorcycle fatalities already make up a hugely disproportional number of the total highway fatalities in the USA. And half of those fatalities occur in single-vehicle accidents.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#245

Post by aeorgnoieang »

bob_theslob646 wrote: post #158
rayiner wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t change the underlying economics of a market by changing your billing model. All the billing model does is change the risk allocation between the parties. Court cases take a long time because each judge handles hundreds of cases (and civil cases take a back seat to criminal cases). Briefing on a motion, for example, might be done over a few weeks. Then the parties just sit and wait possibly for months for a…

Maybe not in the legal field, but the counter example is online advertising (ppc). The better question is why are there not more judges? Everything is also bound by time.Unfortunately in the legal system there is just no incentive to go fast.

I'm willing to bet that judges, and the other people that work with them, and the places in which they work, are all really really fucking expensive. I'd imagine that's hard to sell to voters.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#246

Post by thomastjeffery »

takk309 wrote: post #241
thomastjeffery wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Medical Doctor must have specific training to not harm their patients. An Engineer designs functional things. No reasonable person is going to think that him calling himself an "Electrical Engineer", which he is, construes that he had specific training in designing traffic infrastructure that doesn't accidentally harm people. Traffic infrastructure is not a nuanced topic full of dangerous pitfalls. He was claiming…

I very much disagree with you. While traffic engineering failures may not be as acute as a medical doctor, the effects can be much more expensive and far reaching. For example, let us say that a road has a design speed of 55 mph. That would dictate the maximum curvature of the horizontal alignment. If an engineer chooses to ignore this design speed and makes the corner too tight, there will likely be a crash cluster…

> Another more extreme, yet more common, example is structural engineering.

We aren't even talking about structural engineering here. We are talking about an electrical engineer submitting comments regarding traffic.

The only reason these are related is the word "engineer", which is ambiguous.

The contents of this man's letter are not physically acting upon traffic. They were submitted to be considered by a group of "licensed" traffic engineers.

The subject does not require the decade of specific education that is required by a medical doctor, or even months of training that is required by an EMT.

It's about a traffic light camera, which an electrical engineer would be able to understand significantly better than a layman, making the fact that he is an electrical engineer important to the subject.

The state fined him for his claim of being an engineer, defining the word by its context (traffic lights) instead of by its adjective (electrical).

The state abused this notion to delegitimize his words, and to disincentivize him commenting in the first place.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#247

Post by albedoa »

takk309 wrote: post #139
Kuiper wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he is not allowed to call himself an engineer in such a was as to imply that he is a traffic or transportation engineer. He never claimed to be a traffic or transportation engineer, in fact the fine cited him for use of the phrase "electronics engineer." He is an EE: He has an electrical engineering degree from his home country (Sweden) and he has worked as an electrical engineer for decades. > I am a registered pr…

1> In his initial correspondence with the Board he stated "...I’m already doing thiskind of work..." This was the statement that the board later used as justification for his claim to be an engineer. 2> The practice of engineering is defined in ORS 672.005(1) [1] 3> In the initial communications the board advised him that he should not use the title engineer or refer to himself as an engineer. To which he agreed. Lat…

Why are you assuming that we are not reading the documents?

In the initial September 3, 2014 email where Järlström says he is doing related work, he specifies that his engineering degree is Swedish and that his expertise is in motional feedback of powered speakers. He is anything but misleading.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#248

Post by takk309 »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #227
takk309 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you are clearly stating that you are a software engineer and not purporting to have expertise in traffic engineering, I agree with you.

The problem is that traffic lights are not a complicated nuanced subject where there is one small set of correct methods, and a large subset of dangerous methods. Titles like "Medical Doctor" or "EMT" carry authority, because they require specific training, so that you know how not to kill someone while you are trying to help them. For these professions, it is necessary for the state to demand a set of requirements f…

Traffic signal timing is not a simple as it may appear. Yes, a signal that is all by its self may be easy to time. However coordinating a system with multiple signals and phasing plans can be complicated. Could any technically minded person learn how to do it? Absolutely. However, the same goes for almost any professional service.

>Saying someone must be specific about what kind of engineer they purport to be is quite unreasonable, and unnecessary.

You are essentially saying that any discipline of engineering is the same as any other. This is simply untrue. Do you want me as a traffic engineer doing the job of a chemical engineer? Probably not.

Simply calling oneself an engineer does not make it so. Just as I can't call myself a race car driver because I can drive a car fast by pressing the gas peddle further down. There must be enforcement of titles that effect public health and safety. Traffic engineering is one of those protected titles.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#249

Post by aeorgnoieang »

kejaed wrote: post #96
xigency wrote: post #43

I'm interested in this because I know PE exams exist and there are licensing bodies for engineers. But what I've heard from most people is that they are a waste of time and money for someone holding an engineering degree unless you are the person who rubber stamps things at the end. Does someone who knows more about professional engineering know if this law in Oregon is uncommon? Beyond a free speech argument, it see…

It is the same thing in Canada. "Engineer" is a protected term so that people can trust that when someone calls themselves an engineer, or does "engineering work", offering services to the public, they can trust that means something. One difference is that the profession is 'Self Regulating', meaning Professional Engineers Ontario is a non-governmental body made up of Professional Engineers that is trusted by the gov…

> any act of planning, designing, composing, evaluating, advising, reporting, directing or supervising that requires the application of engineering principles and concerns the safeguarding of life, health, property, economic interests, the public welfare or the environment, or the managing of any such act

In plain language, doesn't this pretty much cover everything? A CFO, or even just an accountant or bookkeeper is probably using things (accounting software) that "requires the application of engineering principles" and "concerns the safeguarding of ... property, economic interests".

I guess it's all moot until a lawyer argues, and a court accepts, reasoning along these lines.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#250

Post by ABCLAW »

pm90 wrote: post #180
jbob2000 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter if his points are valid? I don't need to be a chef to know when the meat is spoiled.

It matters specifically in the case of making legal arguments. I'm not saying the board was right, but please see it from their perspective. A certified traffic engineer would also use the term "engineer" in his findings. The latter's analysis would be given much more weight, be trusted more, simply because that's what certification is meant for . We've created titles and institutions for a purpose, so that Average J…

You may be confusing making arguments with providing testimony as an expert to a tribunal or court.

Expert testimony is evidence, not argument.

Post reply on HN