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

Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

oregonlive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 309 posts

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#61

Post by markdown »

greglindahl wrote: post #56
TheSoftwareGuy wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that’s what is happening here. The suit seems to be predicated on him calling himself an engineer

Where I live, people call themselves engineers all of the time, and it's not considered to imply any particular license or degree or accreditation.

> and it's not considered to imply any particular license or degree or accreditation.

Which sucks, doesn't it. It's advertising (ie. a lie) that's been repeated so much that it's become accepted.

I know many software "engineers". They aren't real engineers, they just didn't like being called software programmers or coders.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#62

Post by [deleted] »

ken wrote: post #54
c3534l wrote: post #7

I know in the US you can call yourself a real estate agent, but not a Realtor unless you're part of the National Association of Realtors. This seems just to me: an organization shouldn't be allowed to steal a word from the English language like "engineer." But if you want to create your own brand and maintain its quality, you're more than welcome to invent a novel term and do that. But simply claiming by fiat that yo…

So you think anyone should be able to call themselves "physicians" or "lawyers" or "police", as those are English words that predate their professional associations?

[deleted]

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#63

Post by bumby »

MetalGuru wrote: post #23

“The record before this Court demonstrates that the Board has repeatedly targeted individuals for using the title ‘engineer’ in non-commercial contexts, including core political speech such as campaigning for public office and advocacy against a local ballot initiative.” Although I agree with the sentiment of the article, I do think it would be deceptive for a politician to claim to be an engineer if they hadn’t done…

I've seen the need for this in software during hiring. Employer states an engineering degree is needed even for CS dominant positions because, unlike accredited engineering programs, there was just too much leeway in CS programs. E.g., one may require four semesters of calculus, another only one resulting in wide ranges of rigor. Instead of inspecting transcripts, HR just specifies an ABET engineering degree.

This attitude is changing, especially as more schools get ABET CS programs, but old ways of doing things change slowly.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#64

Post by [deleted] »

c3534l wrote: post #7

I know in the US you can call yourself a real estate agent, but not a Realtor unless you're part of the National Association of Realtors. This seems just to me: an organization shouldn't be allowed to steal a word from the English language like "engineer." But if you want to create your own brand and maintain its quality, you're more than welcome to invent a novel term and do that. But simply claiming by fiat that yo…

[deleted]

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#65

Post by swalberg »

swalberg wrote: post #51
reaperducer wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The professional engineering association is ruthless in enforcing it. What do they call people who drive trains in Ontario?

In neighbouring Manitoba there's a carve out for locomotive engineers, power engineers, and certain types of electrical work, as long as they're certified by their respective bodies and not pretending to be a different kind of engineer. Didn't see anything in the Ontario act but I wouldn't be surprised if it were there somewhere. edit: https://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/e120e.php#66 section J

Just to follow up on my own post, on slide 29 of http://peo.on.ca/index.php/ci_id/23480/la_id/1.htm there's mention that some of those types of engineers are covered by other provincial/federal regulations and are exempt as long as they're doing the type of work they're licensed to do.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#66

Post by gambiting »

ken wrote: post #54
c3534l wrote: post #7

I know in the US you can call yourself a real estate agent, but not a Realtor unless you're part of the National Association of Realtors. This seems just to me: an organization shouldn't be allowed to steal a word from the English language like "engineer." But if you want to create your own brand and maintain its quality, you're more than welcome to invent a novel term and do that. But simply claiming by fiat that yo…

So you think anyone should be able to call themselves "physicians" or "lawyers" or "police", as those are English words that predate their professional associations?

Sure. I'm just trying to think what would be the negative consequence of someone calling themselves a lawyer or police in a TV interview like here, and I can't think of one, other than the fact that they are making an idiot out of themselves. Like, it shouldn't be illegal.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#67

Post by mLuby »

Retric wrote: post #45
klipt wrote: post #4

Does free speech mean anyone can call themselves a doctor, too?

Actors call themselves doctors etc all the time without issue. So, obviously the issue is more narrow than you’re suggesting. You can’t for example say you’re a doctor when doing so would also constitute fraud.

Yeah but actors can also impersonate police officers (complete with working weapons and police cars) without issue. I think the key part is if you see an actor in a parking lot outside the set still in police costume, they're not going to handcuff you and do a civil forfeiture on your property.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#68

Post by monochromatic »

gambiting wrote: post #66
ken wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think anyone should be able to call themselves "physicians" or "lawyers" or "police", as those are English words that predate their professional associations?

Sure. I'm just trying to think what would be the negative consequence of someone calling themselves a lawyer or police in a TV interview like here, and I can't think of one, other than the fact that they are making an idiot out of themselves. Like, it shouldn't be illegal.

Would it be ok for a non-lawyer to hold himself out as a lawyer and accept money from “clients” who were fooled?

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#69

Post by darpa_escapee »

gambiting wrote: post #66
ken wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think anyone should be able to call themselves "physicians" or "lawyers" or "police", as those are English words that predate their professional associations?

Sure. I'm just trying to think what would be the negative consequence of someone calling themselves a lawyer or police in a TV interview like here, and I can't think of one, other than the fact that they are making an idiot out of themselves. Like, it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone who calls themselves a doctor or a lawyer goes on TV and gives medical or legal advice, that can cause harm and sets a bad precedent.

Re: Federal judge finds state law governing who is an engineer violates free speech

#70

Post by roenxi »

miker64 wrote: post #37
seibelj wrote: post #25

I would argue that occupational licensing is extremely overdone, even in the riskier professions like medicine and dentistry. Here is a recent article from the NYT about the horrible situation of cosmetology licensing: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/business/cosmetology-scho... I'm not saying we don't need occupational licensing whatsoever. But there is no reason someone can't learn to drill a cavity in 6 months…

I think you underestimate the knowledge and training to do dental work safely.

On the flip side, most people underestimate the knowledge and training required to do any work at all safely. Not 1 in 10 men I've seen climbing a ladder have done so in a safe manner.

If someone has not done a procedure before, I don't trust them regardless of their qualification. If they have done a procedure 100 times, I trust them unless their track record is terrible.

I certainly don't think the government needs to enforce these standards the way they do, occupational licensing is not the answer. Information and voluntary schemes would be a lot cheaper, and probably lead to similar quality.

Post reply on HN