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

151–160 of 309 posts

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

#151

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

justinpombrio wrote: post #124
sandworm101 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once worked in the live entertainment industry. We often had engineers sign off on stage/tower structures. When they got the math wrong things fell on heads. Our insurance demanded licensed engineers. Anyone using that term, professing, to be an engineer better be one. This case essentially removes engineer from the list of recognized professions. That club now only belongs to the doctors and lawyers. Even hairdres…

> Our insurance demanded licensed engineers. Anyone using that term, professing, to be an engineer better be one. The guy didn't claim he was licensed. All he said was "I'm an engineer". All the court said was "He can say he's an engineer". This doesn't sound very problematic to me. Like, presumably you'd ask where they were licensed, right? You wouldn't just accept anyone who said they were an engineer, and then rel…

What should we call the people who stoke fires on steam locomotives then?

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

#153

Post by rootusrootus »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #138
rootusrootus wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A master's degree is a negative hiring signal? When did that start?

Getting an MS is completely unimpressive, isn't it? I've read other people such as Google recruiters mention it as a negative signal, in terms of likelihood to pass the interview process.

Well, as someone pursuing their masters in CS, I can't argue that it is not too impressive. I would like to know before I finish if it is actually a negative signal, though ;-).

I'm at the point in my career where it won't make a bit of difference, but I would still figure on it being a mild positive if I were going into the hiring process through the front door. Maybe it will refresh my memory on algorithms enough to do well at one of those useless Google interviews :)

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

#154

Post by rootusrootus »

lstodd wrote: post #137
rootusrootus wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A master's degree is a negative hiring signal? When did that start?

Isn't it obvious? You study for masters, or, god forbid, work on a PhD - you're missing what's going on in the industry for years while demonstrating that you're not interested in building solutions. I'm not sure I'm being sarcastic.

Ha! Agree on the not-sure-if-sarcastic part. I bet you can find plenty of people who actually see it the way you describe.

I'm doing a working master's program myself (yay OMSCS!) so I'm not missing out on the drudgery known as the current industry while I'm pursuing academic solutions to non-existent problems...

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

#155

Post by AmericanChopper »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #145
AmericanChopper wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think you’ll find a strict correlation between level of training required, and salaries. There’s plenty of highly trained people with low salaries. I’d also be willing to bet that trucking accidents kill more people than airline ones.

Maybe so. But one truck accident kills far fewer people than one airline accident. So each individual pilot has considerably more responsibility than each individual truck driver.

Perhaps, but you could go back and forth on that all day. Look at the list of incidents involving at least 50 deaths on wikipedia[0], comparing aviation and road, there a difference, but it’s not an enormous difference.

My point is that I don’t think there’s a strong correlation between risk to public safety, and remuneration, nor between training and remuneration. There’ll likely be some correlation for both, but you can find huge variations in remuneration across different industries that can’t be explained by those factors.

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

#156

Post by paulie_a »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #105
monochromatic wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Difference between a lawyer and a realtor is a lawyer has to get a law degree and pass the bar exam and then really doesn't owe anyone shit. Realtor's are a cross between a MLM and a guild.

Real estate agents are legally acting as a lawyer in a very specific scope in some states. They are considered to be one, again in a very narrow scope.

And no Realtors/real estate agents in no way is anything close to an mlm. They work as an authorized extension of a licenced broker. They work on their behalf with oversight and receive compensation. But that is literally every job.

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

#157

Post by EvanAnderson »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #105
monochromatic wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Difference between a lawyer and a realtor is a lawyer has to get a law degree and pass the bar exam and then really doesn't owe anyone shit. Realtor's are a cross between a MLM and a guild.

Being a real estate sales agent, in my US state, requires licensure. It's not a particularly difficult test, and arguably it has a component or protectionism to it, but there is also liability too.

Realtors (a trademark of the National Asociation of Realtors) are members of a private organization.

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

#158

Post by abduhl »

4thaccount wrote: post #144
gerdesj wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As a licensed professional engineer, I ..." He is an engineer as far as I am concerned (and time served as well as his quali): Jarlstrom, who holds a bachelors of science degree in engineering from Sweden

A professional engineer has to pass a pretty rigorous test that takes every bit of 8 hours for most folks. I studied for hundreds of hours for mine (not kidding) and it took me two tries to pass. I know great engineers who are trying for the sixth time. Getting an engineering degree is really hard at most colleges. Passing the Fundamentals of Engineering exam is also challenging, but a joke compared to the P.E. exam.…

Let's not oversell the PE or the FE: I took both drunk and completed them in under 3 hours each.

The true point of being a professional engineer is that you've satisfied the MINIMUM requirements to be licensed and, therefore, you are licensed by the state to sign off on documents within what you consider your expertise. It relies on you to make that determination with the understanding that you should know better, recognizing the legal and professional ramifications if you practice outside your expertise.

I disagree with the Oregon ruling: holding yourself out as an engineer without licensure is not acceptable and should not be encouraged. It creates confusion amongst the public about what a licensed engineer is and who to trust.

The guy could have easily put out his findings as an interested party or something without trying to invoke the goodwill that people like you and I have put so much effort into engendering.

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

#159

Post by chaseha »

sandworm101 wrote: post #106
eigenvector wrote: post #32

As a licensed professional engineer, I find the effort exerted by various state and provincial licensing bodies to regulate the use of the term 'engineer' a bit tiresome. Yes, it's important to regulate the practice of engineering, but unlike some other types of professionals engineers rarely if ever offer their services to Joe Public. It's not like we have guys putting up billboards on the side of the highway advert…

I once worked in the live entertainment industry. We often had engineers sign off on stage/tower structures. When they got the math wrong things fell on heads. Our insurance demanded licensed engineers. Anyone using that term, professing, to be an engineer better be one. This case essentially removes engineer from the list of recognized professions. That club now only belongs to the doctors and lawyers. Even hairdres…

Completely disagree. It says he can call himself an engineer in a non-professional context.

Having a ChBE BS, I am an engineer (although no longer working as one). I am not a Professional Engineer (not a licensed PE). There’s a difference - doesn’t mean I should not be able to call myself an engineer, and I’m sure others w engineering degrees would agree

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

#160

Post by jdeibele »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #151
justinpombrio wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Our insurance demanded licensed engineers. Anyone using that term, professing, to be an engineer better be one. The guy didn't claim he was licensed. All he said was "I'm an engineer". All the court said was "He can say he's an engineer". This doesn't sound very problematic to me. Like, presumably you'd ask where they were licensed, right? You wouldn't just accept anyone who said they were an engineer, and then rel…

What should we call the people who stoke fires on steam locomotives then?

Traditionally they're called firemen.

Steam locomotives aren't commonly used anymore, so I assume you're making a joke about somebody on a train being a "firefighter".

Post reply on HN