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

111–120 of 309 posts

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

#111

Post by gerdesj »

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…

"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

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

#112

Post by wallace_f »

darpa_escapee wrote: post #100
wallace_f wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even worse, people who never mention they're doctors can cause harm by saying vaccinations cause autism. It doesn't mean it should be illegal. Due process can cause some predators to roam free, or cost taxpayers and victims expense to the benefit of evil people. This argument that something should be illegal because it can cause harm is really shallow.

I guess I just don't see the harm in requiring someone to say "I am not a doctor, but..." if they want to give medical advice while giving themselves the title of Dr. without having earned it. However, I do see the harm in someone pretending to be a doctor and giving medical advice that can hurt or kill someone.

People should be held liable for intentionally stating non-truths with respect to one's own, or another's character: ie falsely claiming to have a certain medical license.

Howver, I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that ordinary people should not be able to tell their children, friends, parents, or anyone, medical advice. If so, where does it end? Can you tell your child to take medication? Which medications? Can you help victims of accidents? Give CPR? Can you tell your Father not to get that particular medical treatment? Can you tell someone to not trust a particular doctor? What you're suggesting sounds like a litigious nightmare of egg shells through life.

On principle, should we not err towards advocating for granting power to the people instead of centralized, corporate and government authority structures? Or do you just not believe in that?

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

#113

Post by lotsofpulp »

loeg wrote: post #101
ghaff wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two of the three fields you mention are not paid especially well on average.

Pilots have an extremely high hourly rate if you discount the time autopilot is engaged (and senior pilots make a lot more than junior pilots).

The quality of life hit is huge being away from home, sitting all the time, working nights, solar radiation, and having to work your way up in seniority in an industry that has a lot of ups and down.

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

#114

Post by loeg »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #113
loeg wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pilots have an extremely high hourly rate if you discount the time autopilot is engaged (and senior pilots make a lot more than junior pilots).

The quality of life hit is huge being away from home, sitting all the time, working nights, solar radiation, and having to work your way up in seniority in an industry that has a lot of ups and down.

Sure — but I think the original argument — that the pilot's union has artificially kept pay relatively high — is valid. Truck drivers have a very similar job but worse compensation (especially comparing senior workers).

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

#115

Post by loeg »

phonon wrote: post #109
loeg wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E.g., "Dr" Oz. Although I suspect most doctors are less likely to do that than folks who do not hold a medical degree.

Dr. Oz is very much a medical doctor. Oz has been a professor at the Department of Surgery at Columbia University since 2001. He directs the Cardiovascular Institute and Complementary Medicine Program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital. His research interests include heart valve replacement surgery, minimally invasive cardiac surgery, and health care policy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_Oz

Yes, that's my point — you don't need to not have an M.D. to spout completely false medical claims on television. I think he's a quack and his license should be revoked.

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

#116

Post by codinger »

sys_64738 wrote: post #97

Engineers stake their professional reputation on their designs being up to the specification required in their field of expertise. Software has all these disclaimers that its "as-is" to protect against being sued when it goes awry. True engineers don't have such protections so certainly in software development the developer should not be called engineer.

Ah, the good ole no true engineer fallacy.

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

#117

Post by 8bitsrule »

Always find people amusing who think identity is built around a person currently employed because of their skill-set.

I recall talking to a person years ago when I was between jobs as a [job title].

"What do you do?"

"Oh, I'm a [job title]."

"Oh nice. Where do you [job title] at?"

"I'm not [job title]ing anywhere at the moment."

"Oooooooh, well! Then you're not a [job title]!"

By this logic, you're not a blacksmith if your not pounding out red-hot horseshoes. Or a doctor if, after 20 years in surgery, you've granted yourself a two-year vacation in the Bahamas.

In this POV, though, ex-political leaders, ex-military leaders get to keep their titles. Say what?

Linkletter was right: people are funny.

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

#119

Post by DINKDINK »

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?

Järlström didn't claim he was a Professional Engineer (a very specific certification) just an engineer. This case is akin to someone who does wood working in their house (maybe even studied it) calling themselves a carpenter but not a Licensed Carpenter.

Speech can never be a crime "They have uttered the untoward words! Imprison them." Speech can breach a contract "You agreed not to yell fire in my theater, you owe me damages"

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

#120

Post by pnw_hazor »

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…

Realtor is protected by trademark law.
Post reply on HN