North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering • Hacker News Board

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

#71

Post by ghaff » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

SeanLuke wrote: post #45

prepend wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 invalid…

Being a licensed engineer is not a requirement to being an "expert" in expert testimony. You are an expert if the court deems you an expert and the opposing counsel has agreed. Full stop. I think that the only thing an engineering license should grant you, in this case, is the right to call yourself a licensed engineer, which conveys some degree of authority. I don't think he made that claim.

Not sure why people are disagreeing. I've co-written an expert witness report and neither myself nor my co-author were licensed software engineers--which I don't believe you can even get licensed for any longer in the US.

Of course, both the lawyers and the judge can take both credentials and experience into account when evaluating the credibility of such a report.

Obviously, if someone isn't licensed they can't present themselves as being licensed and various regulatory agencies and the like may require someone to be licensed in order to sign off on various documents.

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

#72

Post by gavinhoward » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

deftnerd wrote: post #52

colechristensen wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 expe…

You do make a good point. It makes me think of the occasional video of a registered nurse standing in front of a City Council saying things like vaccines cause Autism, or the COVID-19 vaccine has tracking chips in it. Seeing that makes me think that they should lose their license, which goes against the feeling I feel in this engineers case. That makes me worry that I'm making my decision based on if I think what the…

Should the nurses lose their license if there is an element of truth to what they are saying? For example, vaccines probably don't cause autism, but it's possible they could be an aggravating factor. Further research necessary.

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

#73

Post by travisjungroth » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:38 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

The worst example of this is Oregon has their own version of the FAA. It’s grandfathered in because it was established before the FAA. You pay $12 a year for an Oregon pilot’s registration. And in return for this bureaucracy, society gets... nothing.

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

#74

Post by teorema » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

erikerikson wrote: post #49

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…

Particularly in advertising providing medical advice and what can be said is highly regulated. For good reason too. Intravenous bleach suggested by someone we trusted may have caused some real harm. It would seem reasonable to remove a doctor's license to practice medicine for giving such advice. Of course broad scale communication is different than specific testimony in court, especially from a seasoned practitioner…

I'm probably in the minority with this, but I think all licensing laws should be abolished. Even with cases like the one you describe, other mechanisms could be used to handle the problem and those individuals likely at are risk for doing things on their own anyway.

I'd say if someone took IV bleach and it caused harm, the appropriate response isn't license revocation, it's a civil or criminal lawsuit.

The past year is full of examples of the dangers of regulating speech by government in the name of medical safety. The FDA decision on the antibody treatment for Alzheimer's provides a converse example, of how expertise can be foolish.

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

#75

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:40 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #66

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

So when is ERCOT's tenure due? Moste useless of the useless.

2022-2023: https://www.sunset.texas.gov/reviews-and-reports/agencies/pu...

Texas Leg passed legislation in 2011 to have ERCOT reviewed whenever the PUC (its regulator) is reviewed: https://www.sunset.texas.gov/reviews-and-reports/agencies/el...

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

#76

Post by hhfnkyfvj » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #66

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #33

Texas may do a lot of crazy things when it comes to state government, but one thing I think we definitely got right is the Texas Sunset Commission ( https://www.sunset.texas.gov/ ). Basically, all boards set up by the state government are automatically abolished every 10 years I believe unless the state legislature passes a law to continue the board. So every 10 years the Sunset Commission evaluates agencies/boards a…

So when is ERCOT's tenure due? Moste useless of the useless.

This isn't Reddit, you can keep the little "clever" quips to yourself.

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

#77

Post by elliekelly » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

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…

The topic of “unauthorized practice of law” was my favorite in the required legal ethics course because it’s really hard to define. There’s definitely a compelling state interest in preventing just anyone from running around giving people shitty legal advice. Bad legal advice could mean someone serving years, or even a lifetime, in prison. But at the same time the people have a right to discuss the law, how it is (and should be) interpreted, and the implications of those interpretations. It’s maybe even more than a right. It’s arguably a requirement of a functional democracy. If you can’t discuss the law you can’t have a role in shaping it

And balancing those two important interests most states have drawn the line at: you can’t tell (or insinuate to) the public you’re a licensed attorney if you’re not and you can’t file legal documents with a court or a regulator on behalf of someone else unless under the supervision of a licensed attorney.

You can, however, spout your terrible and blatantly wrong legal opinion all over the internet, tv, and in print to anyone willing to listen. No law license required. Many people have even made a career of it.

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

#78

Post by wizzwizz4 » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:46 PM UTC

fragileone wrote: post #60

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US was actually founded with the idea that this should be done to the entire constitution every couple of decades.

[citation needed]

https://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/thomas-jefferson-on-whethe...

> The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water… (But) between society and society, or generation and generation there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature. We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another… On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.

I think Thomas Jefferson is a reputable source for my assertion.

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

#79

Post by dylan604 » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:46 PM UTC

hhfnkyfvj wrote: post #76

dylan604 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So when is ERCOT's tenure due? Moste useless of the useless.

This isn't Reddit, you can keep the little "clever" quips to yourself.

Thanks. I was confused what website I was using. I'm pretty sure there's an HN rule about not telling people this isn't reddit: "Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills."

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

#80

Post by joshuaissac » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 2:47 PM UTC

dotancohen wrote: post #46

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…

> It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without > issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking. I'll take the opportunity to branch OT. This selective enforcement has always been such a problem, has there ever been any attempt - anywhere - to address it? Such that if a citizen can demonstrate selective enforcement he can also be absolved of the same crimes that the rest of the pop…

> Such that if a citizen can demonstrate selective enforcement he can also be absolved of the same crimes that the rest of the population is absolved of?

A judge in London gave a convicted drug user a conditional discharge following the former Lord Chancellor admitting to using the same drug. Not a precedent-setting case, however.

https://www.legalcheek.com/2019/06/judge-tells-cocaine-user-...