The dangers of unlicensed engineering • Hacker News Board

Re: The dangers of unlicensed engineering

#71

Post by glenjamin » Fri, Feb 04, 2011, 2:53 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #2

> He said there is a potential for violation if DOT > and the public were misled by "engineering-quality > work"- even if the authors did not claim to be > engineers. Isn't this essentially saying that you can be too smart/thorough for your own good, and that the government is going to punish you for not getting a license to use your abilities? What the hell is 'engineering-quality work' anyways? Talk about an amorph…

As I see it, either his report is solid and contains no factual errors or incorrect assumptions (and thus is "engineering quality work") - in which case since it's correct then there should not be any issues in following its conclusion.

Or alternatively, his report contains fallacies and invalid conclusions - but by extension is no longer of engineering quality.

Re: The dangers of unlicensed engineering

#72

Post by Confusion » Fri, Feb 04, 2011, 5:55 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #53

joe_the_user wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like if someone stitches me up, in an emergency, after warning me they aren't a doctor, they will be sued by the AMA for "doctor-level work".

No, not really. This is more like if you're dying and someone gives you CPR but didn't pay $20 to renew their CPR certification, the CPR certification board goes after them for "practicing lifesaving without a license". In other words, utter fucking bullshit.

You say "No, not really", but I think you are in full agreement with your parent, who also sketched an instance of something ridiculous.

Re: The dangers of unlicensed engineering

#73

Post by VladRussian » Fri, Feb 04, 2011, 8:18 PM UTC

j_baker wrote: post #60

VladRussian wrote: post #15

was it started by DMCA? I mean the practice of limiting, even outlawing, of analytical thinking.

Ahem... Does the name Galileo mean anything to you? How about Socrates?

there is somewhat fine difference. For example Galileo was allowed to think about how Universe works. The practical law limited what he was allowed to think about Universe.

The DMCA, or like in this article's "engineering" case, outlaws the whole act of thinking. Some areas are just off limit, no matter what you think, Sun rotates around the Earth or Earth around Sun.

Re: The dangers of unlicensed engineering

#74

Post by j_baker » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 3:06 AM UTC

VladRussian wrote: post #73

j_baker wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahem... Does the name Galileo mean anything to you? How about Socrates?

there is somewhat fine difference. For example Galileo was allowed to think about how Universe works. The practical law limited what he was allowed to think about Universe. The DMCA, or like in this article's "engineering" case, outlaws the whole act of thinking. Some areas are just off limit, no matter what you think, Sun rotates around the Earth or Earth around Sun.

It wasn't so much the actual idea of the earth rotating around the sun that Galileo was punished for. It was more the fact that Galileo used analytical thinking to reach that conclusion rather than basing it on some respected Roman or Greek philosopher or the bible. If Galileo had determined that the earth rotated around the sun based on some scripture, there would likely have not been any trial. People might have thought him an idiot or disagreed with him, but they wouldn't have thought him a heretic.