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

North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

ij.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 408 posts

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#21

Post by civil_engineer »

clejack wrote: post #5

I first read this and immediately thought it was ridiculous. After a second read, I'm wondering if there is some deception going on. The idea that a license should be required to make advisement on designs impacting the public is reasonable. While nothing is guaranteed, it allows for a simple verification of skills. I find it hard to believe that any engineer would not know this because I was told companies and the g…

If he represented himself as an engineer or engineering expert in a legal proceeding, well, that’s where he may have made a mis-step. Even if it’s on behalf of his son. Maybe, he should have prefaced every sentence with IANAE, but…

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#22

Post by brudgers »

michaelmcdonald wrote: post #6

I found this line to be particularly interesting: > In fact, like the majority of engineers nationwide, Wayne was not required to get a license since he worked for a company under the state’s “industrial exception.” A half-minute search on Google didn't seem to produce anything of relevance, but I did come across numerous articles talking about licensing not being needed. Would be curious to see more hard data on the…

I worked in a building department. My experience is there is a correlation between unsafe construction and unlicensed individuals.

A large degree of the correlation is lack of experience, so there are corner cases where unlicensed individuals build something safe.

But generally it won’t meet building code and the building code describes the very worst construction that is legal…

…and even that is hard to get right because licensed professionals struggle with it all the time and that’s why I was reviewing plans.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#23

Post by umvi »

eru wrote: post #4

I remember discussions here on HN where people were looking forward to regulating software engineering.

Some people want software engineering to be like other engineering disciplines where a PE license and/or union membership is mandatory to practice the trade.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#24

Post by rpeden »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #20

What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion! Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeles…

I know it's a typo, but jaw walking definitely sounds like an arrest-worthy offense. :)

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#25

Post by colechristensen »

mkl95 wrote: post #12

Useless bureaucracy hinders innovation and progress. I live in Spain where engineering is very regulated. This results in some engineers spending 6+ years in university to gain the same status as their international peers who studied for 3 or 4 years. There's no point in enforcing this other than collecting fees to pay the salaries of people who don't really do anything.

There is a point to enforcing it, but sometimes it is way overdone.

It is a license to speak truth about a profession and perform it. Making bullshit illegal. It works for certain professions where the individual can be a commodity and the customer can't reliably determine the trust themselves.

When you're designing bridges or homes or public infrastructure, a lot of times it can be very difficult to pick a good expert (which is necessary, these things can screw up and end lives and waste billions), so you have professional organizations which do the verification for you. Somebody else makes the "hiring decision" which is fine.

But if you lose focus of what the purpose is, you get bureaucratic zealots who follow regulations without any attention to what they are for.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#26

Post by morelisp »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #16
yokaze wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read the letter linked in the article: https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/NC_Engineering_051... It looks to me more the latter: he "helping his son" by "speaking about engineering" is a written report in a court case. Quite a bit of framing

Court itself can decide what proof of expertise is acceptable. It should not be just a license.

If a court decides HN gets mad and wonders why judges get to determine engineering matters. If an engineering board decides HN gets mad and wonders why engineers have a say in legal matters.

You can waffle with "it's not the same part of HN" or something, but honestly it sounds more like a lot of HN just doesn't like anything which might prevent them from offering their opinion in inappropriate contexts, and their mechanism to avoid this is to refuse to let anyone judge the appropriateness of a context.

Big "what's next, a license to toast" energy from all this tbh.

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#27

Post by dstick »

rpeden wrote: post #24
the_lonely_road wrote: post #20

What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion! Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeles…

I know it's a typo, but jaw walking definitely sounds like an arrest-worthy offense. :)

I don’t know, that seems enough punishment in and of itself ;-)

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#28

Post by morelisp »

blfr wrote: post #17
taneq wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends very much on precisely what you're talking about. Someone giving an opinion on a physical system? Absolutely should not be regulated. Someone giving engineering advice and representing that advice as the result of rigorous analysis and themselves as an authority on the topic ? I can see an argument for regulating that. We place similar expectations on legal and medical advice, and wrong engineering advice…

We place similar expectations on legal and medical advice We do and received terrible medical advice during the latest pandemic while people trying to correct it were getting banned from social media. We are also reaping results of decades of terrible dietary advice. The track record for censorship isn't great.

You're right, the unregulated dietary supplements market looks so much better!

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#29

Post by prepend »

roenxi wrote: post #3

No opinion on whether this is a new development or not, but needing a license to talk about engineering is really stupid. By far the majority of engineering work is stating the obvious. Even a novice with some calculus background could probably come to the right answer if they had access to the necessary data. Maybe they'd need a little help warming up. Engineers are just more reliable at getting to the obvious answe…

I think the issue is he gave expert testimony. So it’s not just speaking about it, but presenting from a position of authority without qualification.

I think the whole expert testimony business is suspect as the definition of “expert” varies so much. But I think the correction is in the law specifying what is expect and not and making that better is the place to focus.

It seems like the correction would be to invalidate his testimony, not to arrest him.

It’s really hard to have legal expert testimony and separate true experts vs people with other motivators (money, family, etc).

Re: North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering

#30

Post by prepend »

PaulHoule wrote: post #14
eru wrote: post #4

I remember discussions here on HN where people were looking forward to regulating software engineering.

That’s one thing. Criminal charges for expressing your opinion is another. An airplane pilot is licensed and will talk trash w/ people about flying and not get in trouble unless they express an opinion like ‘i love to drink a six pack before I get in the cockpit’. Other people say what they want about aviation and unless it is something like ‘I used this one weird trick to smuggle a sniper rifle past the X ray backsc…

> Criminal charges for expressing your opinion is another.

Being a paid expert witness is different than “expressing your opinion.” It’s one thing to be subpoenaed and compelled to testify and another to swear and speak authoritatively. Expert testimony “opinion” could result in people going to jail, or in this case paying large sums of money.

I imagine a case of medical malpractice where an unlicensed doctor was expertly testifying as to the proper procedure. That seems inappropriate.

Post reply on HN