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

271–280 of 325 posts

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

#271

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…

> how do you prove his credentials?

You don't.

"Engineer" is not broadly considered a claim of authority. It is a claim of knowledge.

If I am required to provide credentials whenever I say "engineer", then how, as someone without credentials, am I supposed to express my background?

I'll simply choose another word, which will have the exact meaning that "engineer" currently does. Why? Because you redefined the word.

The word "engineer" is perfectly adequate in its current state.

If you really want to know whether you can trust an engineer in his or her capacity, you will then ask for some credentials, like a degree or state-sponsored license. The fact that anyone can use the word "engineer" to describe him or herself does not in any way detract from that.

The reason that MD, EMT, or police officer are different is that every individual who claims that title is treated with authority.

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

#272

Post by takk309 »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #265
CalChris wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's about a traffic light camera, which an electrical engineer would be able to understand significantly better than a layman I would go further and say that as a EE working in the field he would understand this issue better than a traffic engineer would.

By defining a "traffic engineer" as a title that demands license, we prevent discussion from other people. I am very critical of the idea that a license should be required to discuss the traffic system that we all interact with.

There is nothing preventing you from talking about traffic systems. There are, however, laws preventing you from claiming to be an engineer with expertise in the subject in a public forum.

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

#273

Post by notlob »

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…

This misses my point. My point is that while I am a "doctor" I am not a physician, and that even though I use the title in other places it's prudent to be very careful about it in a medical setting because it could be misconstrued. Perhaps it would be prudent to demonstrate similar care when addressing the government organization that cares very much about licensing engineers while one is using the industrial exemption.

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

#274

Post by thomastjeffery »

aeorgnoieang wrote: post #255
thomastjeffery wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other problem is that they invade privacy. Having a camera constantly recording in a public area is not something that I find reasonable. Cameras do not announce their presence. Cameras do not get tired, or leave. Cameras made for law enforcement assume guilt.

I'm torn about this. Surveillance by people is expensive, grueling, and hard to hide. If I imagine police wanting to replace a team of people surveilling some person or people or place with a camera, I don't notice any outrage. It's more the ubiquity of surveillance that seems unreasonable, but, like a lot of things, there's no clear dividing line between what should be allowed and what should be prohibited. And it's…

> If I imagine police wanting to replace a team of people surveilling some person or people or place with a camera, I don't notice any outrage.

Here you are talking about "warranted" surveillance.

Traffic cameras are warrantless.

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

#275

Post by czep »

buxtehude wrote: post #199
czep wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maddening? That sounds perfectly peaceful to me! It sounds like everyone just wants to get where they're going, safely. Why do you feel so driven (!) to go so fast? Given the choice between what you describe---an orderly set of traffic at near the speed limit---or a free-for-all in which inevitably an aggressive lane-changer clips someone at 85mph spreading blood and metal all over the highway and stopping traffic fo…

I'm not sure if you're just trolling here, but will address some issues. The assumption that a set maximum speed is the safest for all drivers is erroneous. There are many factors at play and a proper safe speed depends in part on the driver, the driving conditions, and the car they are driving (and much more). Unless you are in very heavy traffic, forcing people to go slow or worse to pass you on the right is causin…

I am most certainly not trolling, I was merely pointing out that the parent's characterization that "its maddening that all 3 lanes seem to travel within 3-5 mph of each other, usually right at the speed limit" sounds to me a lot better than 3 lanes with large speed differentials between them.

I don't understand the desire for people to want to exceed the speed limit, even if as you maintain, they are capable drivers in suitable conditions with a suitable vehicle. The speed limit should just not be exceeded, except when needed to expedite an overtake. Whether you believe you are capable of safely driving 85 is irrelevant if the speed limit is 65.

> forcing people to go slow or worse to pass you on the right is causing a much larger safety issue

You are pinning an argument that I never made. I was never defending left-lane bandits. If someone is driving 10 under in the left lane, yes that's bad they should stop that. But if all 3 lanes are moving steadily at the speed limit, you have no right to insist that people move to accomodate your desire to exceed the limit.

You are bringing up Germany to suggest that it's safe to have faster speed limits, but then mention that licensing requirements are much more stringent in Germany. I wish the US had such requirements, we might then have a safer culture of driving! You can't take Autobahn rules and try to make them work in the US because the level of driving ability is so poor.

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

#276

Post by drewmol »

mywittyname wrote: post #253
drewmol wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm seeing some interesting POV's on thread (and some road rage issues) but I'm genuinely curious: if the speed limit plays no part in the equation... Let's say I'm traveling ~85 in the left most lane while passing cars in the center lane traveling ~60(posted max speed). Car behind me approaches going 200. Should I be expected to slow down to 60 and force a merge to center lane in order to yeild to the girl going 200…

You should move into the center lane when it is clear to do so and continue in that lane until the need arises to pass someone. I don't understand why people want to pick fights with other people while driving. A person traveling way too fast is clearly does care about acting dangerously, why the hell would you want to aggravate that person? The best outcome is nothing happens, the worst outcome is your death. Plus,…

I agree. That's what I do, just a thought experiment for the above comments who say they get engaged at certain driving behaviors. When I was younger I used scaugh at people who stopped under bridges during inclement weather, I've seen enough accidents that now I just assume they have enough to live for that 20 minutes isn't worth the added risk.

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

#277

Post by czep »

rconti wrote: post #222
czep wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maddening? That sounds perfectly peaceful to me! It sounds like everyone just wants to get where they're going, safely. Why do you feel so driven (!) to go so fast? Given the choice between what you describe---an orderly set of traffic at near the speed limit---or a free-for-all in which inevitably an aggressive lane-changer clips someone at 85mph spreading blood and metal all over the highway and stopping traffic fo…

Occasionally people need to change lanes, which is impossible when every lane is packed with cars going nowhere. Driving slow as shit and obliviously or passive-aggressively blocking traffic impedes traffic flow, causes tailgating, incites road rage, and does nothing pleasant whatsoever.

Parent said all lanes driving "usually right at the speed limit". How do you interpret that as "Driving slow as shit"?

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

#278

Post by thomastjeffery »

takk309 wrote: post #272
thomastjeffery wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By defining a "traffic engineer" as a title that demands license, we prevent discussion from other people. I am very critical of the idea that a license should be required to discuss the traffic system that we all interact with.

There is nothing preventing you from talking about traffic systems. There are, however, laws preventing you from claiming to be an engineer with expertise in the subject in a public forum.

A man claimed to be an "electrical engineer", and was fined for doing so, because the word "engineer" was taken in context to mean "traffic engineer", which is a licensed title.

The issue I take to this is that you must have a recognized title to claim knowledge.

This has two problems:

1. People outside of a group of recognition have unnecessary difficulty giving input. This degrades the "public" aspect of the forum.

2. Common words like "engineer" are redefined to have more authority than they do outside the forum. This means that those with broad engineering expertise and knowledge that is applicable to the subject are considered to not have any applicable knowledge or expertise.

It may be reasonable to require credentials from someone who is doing the engineering, or someone who makes final decisions.

It is not reasonable to require credentials from everyone who uses a noun to describe him or herself.

If you want credentials from someone who claims to be an engineer, then you can ask for them. Credentials need not be assumed.

There are positions like MD, EMT, Police Officer, etc. that do imply credentials. These titles inherently require trust and respect, so claiming one without credentials is fraudulent. "Engineer" does not fit into that category.

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

#279

Post by romwell »

trvlngwlbry wrote: post #133
manyxcxi wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Growing up in Oregon I was always annoyed by the slow as hell left lane campers. Having spent a half decade elsewhere and recently moving back it has escalated from annoyance to blood boiling seething rage. When I left Seattle, the state of WA was really making a push to get slowpokes out of the left lane with a media campaign and instituting tickets for people who are slowing traffic down. I LOVE the idea.

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…

The idea won't work.

In TX, all highways have clear signs saying "LEFT LANE FOR PASSING ONLY", and guess how many people notice them?

I've also known people who think it's OK to be in the left lane if they're going the speed limit.

Do you think these people will be educated by waving a sign in front of them from a motorcycle? They'll just get angry.

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

#280

Post by leesalminen »

0x445442 wrote: post #259
leesalminen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fortunately, in Arizona the state is still required to serve in person in order for the ticket to be binding. Colorado as well. > We just throw them in the trash. This worked once for me. The second time, an off duty Sheriff's Deputy came to my house and served me.

That happened to us once I think but it was not law enforcement. They tried to have someone serve us in the evening. We just didn't answer the door

Interesting...the guy flashed some kind of metal, cop looking badge. They do give badges to lots of people these days other than police/sheriff so I guess it could've been any .gov thug.
Post reply on HN