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

Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 258 posts

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#131

Post by tn135 »

patorjk wrote: post #35

Everyone's talking about the title issue, but it's amazing that the Oregon board doesn't believe he should be able to publish or present his ideas. You can go on and on about what it means to be a certain title, but the man should be able to put forth his work and ideas.

True. Just because Oregon board has a narrow view of what the word 'engineer' means I do not think this gentleman should be harassed this way. I find this immoral.

Another instance I can recount is here where a woman was banned from touching horses.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/02/17/woman-could-go-to-jail-for...

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#132

Post by jack9 »

avar wrote: post #43

This title is misleading clickbait, from the article: > of more concern, are the documents you > provided that indicate you may have > engaged in unlicensed engineering work > in Oregon. They're clearly being dicks, but him calling himself an engineer in an E-Mail isn't the full story.

I noticed that the story has salient omissions. Clickbait, possibly. Miscarriage of the public interest, probably.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#133

Post by anigbrowl »

xkcd-sucks wrote: post #114
anigbrowl wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but he wouldn't be engaging in the practice of engineering if he were to disclaim the title of engineer. Of course, if Jarlstrom were to disavow being a licensed engineer, he might not have garnered as much as interest for his proposals as he did by implying he possessed the relevant credential.

ORS 672.005(1)(b) simply describes 'stuff an engineer does', in terrifyingly broad strokes. If "professional services or creative work" could be read as "services or creative work, either of which are done for money," perhaps it would be okay?

It's a mistake to pick out individual phrases and treat them as if they were mathematical equalities. Look at the preamble to that section:

'As used in ORS 672.002 (Definitions for ORS 672.002 to 672.325) to 672.325 (Civil penalties), unless the context requires otherwise:'

It's terrifying because you are reading bits of it out of context and extrapolating incorrectly to the broadest scope imaginable. I perform some of the activities on this list on almost a daily basis just in the normal course of making things and being an artist (the old-fashioned variety slapping paint on canvas). I have exactly zero fear of ever being prosecuted for unlicensed engineering activities.

How you should be reading it: ORS 672.005 described things that an engineer does as part of their work. Then you go on to look at ORS 672.007 which talks about how

  (1) A *person* is practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person:
  (a) By verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or in any other way implies that the person is or purports to be a registered professional engineer;
  (b) Through the use of some other title implies that the person is an engineer or a registered professional engineer; or
  (c) Purports to be able to perform, or who does perform, any service or work that is defined by ORS 672.005 (Additional definitions) as the practice of engineering.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/672.007

You are not going to get fined just for calculating the hypotenuse of a triangle in public. In programming terms, you're worrying about the value of a variable without considering its scope.

Forgot to mention that all emphases are added by me.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#134

Post by ChicagoBoy11 »

takk309 wrote: post #130
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #109

Professional licensing of just about every kind serves one and one purpose only: Fatten someone's pocket and artificially restrict the labor supply to favor those already licensed. Period. You can certainly make an argument that it looks like he went out of his way to piss 'em off, but the fact that he could be charged for calling himself "an engineer" -- and the fact that we all have come to a point where we think i…

Professional licensing exists to protect the public at large from fraud. Would you want a public building, say a sports stadium, designed by someone without the proper training? Engineering licenses add a layer of protection and assurance that the person performing the work is truly capable of performing the work.

We were told the same thing about Taxis -- or at least that part of that red tape was to ensure the safety of riders.

Yet this company comes along that very aggressively flies in the face of this licensing and the world flocks to it.

We can't equate the inexistence of mandated licensing to there not being feedback mechanism for quality, competence, etc. If we did not mandate licensing, don't you think those would emerge? And perhaps even be better?

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#135

Post by echion »

rmxt wrote: post #115
echion wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He clearly would. Just doing the things is deemed "engineering", even if he called it "monading".

Using the title "engineer" in conjunction with "submitting the critique and calculations [...] to members of the public for consideration and modification [...] of traffic signals", I believe, is the critical part here. If he had merely submitted the "critique and calculations" for "consideration" as a concerned citizen, he would have not gotten a fine. Simply put, he called himself an engineer and suggested that pub…

> Using the title "engineer" in conjunction with "submitting the critique and calculations [...] to members of the public for consideration and modification [...] of traffic signals", I believe, is the critical part here.

I hear you, and agree that when he says "I'm an engineer", we have a certain set of laws that apply to that speech.

I'm saying there is another aspect which is the the crux of the reply-to-top-level comment to which I objected: that Final Report is saying "doing [math and stuff] on [public things] is engineering, and you did [math and stuff], so you're doing engineering without a license". I don't think my "the Final Report is saying..." is unfair: check the Final Report sections 8,9, and 10.

I bet there are a lot of confounding issues in this particular case, but, very narrowly, what I'm saying is that using publicly-available data and speaking (without saying "I'm an engineer") of applications of "special knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences" cannot be illegal or fine-able, yet this is pretty literally what sentence three of section 13 (Final Order, Page 6) says is happening.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#136

Post by anigbrowl »

echion wrote: post #101
anigbrowl wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but he wouldn't be engaging in the practice of engineering if he were to disclaim the title of engineer. Of course, if Jarlstrom were to disavow being a licensed engineer, he might not have garnered as much as interest for his proposals as he did by implying he possessed the relevant credential.

He clearly would. Just doing the things is deemed "engineering", even if he called it "monading".

No. See my other reply above. You're ignoring important context that defines personal behavior separately from defining what the professional duties of an engineer include.

As a simple example, if you have a faint and I ask you if you're all right, what you're feeling etc., that doesn't mean I'm practicing medicine without a license despite the diagnostic nature of my questions.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#137

Post by slavik81 »

blackguardx wrote: post #44
glibgil wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computer engineer is something else. It is like an electrical engineer for computing

No, a computer engineering program typically offers a blended course of software and hardware. It is typically half way between computer science and electrical engineering. That being said, it all depends on the university. At some universities, you can pretty much take all comp sci classes as a computer engineering major. The major difference is that it is a "real engineering" degree in that it requires the engineer…

It was definitely a blend at Queen's University in Ontario. Computer engineers could choose between hardware and software specializations. All engineers shared a common first year. Then all electrical and computer engineers shared a common second year. Third and forth years focused more on the specialties, though there was still significant overlap.

Also worth noting, professional registrations may not line up exactly with degrees. You don't necessarily need a degree in computer engineering to be a computer engineer. The board would likely find a degree in electrical engineering and a few years of relevant work experience to be sufficient. (Though, this may vary by jurisdiction.)

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#138

Post by ChicagoBoy11 »

jpambrun wrote: post #129
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #109

Professional licensing of just about every kind serves one and one purpose only: Fatten someone's pocket and artificially restrict the labor supply to favor those already licensed. Period. You can certainly make an argument that it looks like he went out of his way to piss 'em off, but the fact that he could be charged for calling himself "an engineer" -- and the fact that we all have come to a point where we think i…

No. It's about public safety. Do you want anybody calling themselves Doctors and making surgery without proper training? How about civil engineers building bridge? How about software engineers that work on medical devices that can kill? If you are building iOS apps you are probably a developer, not an engineer.

I actually do. Doctors with "proper training" still kill people and are grossly negligent. Like I replied to someone above, where I think I and you would sharply disagree on is the notion that without mandated professional licensing it would be a free for all. I don't think that is true at all. I think systems of accreditation, checking for competency, etc. would emerge, and likely even be better than the ones we have today.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#139

Post by wl »

JBReefer wrote: post #125
nxc18 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words for example. There are more limitations but that's an easy and possibly counterintuitive example.

That and the Shouting Fire thing are both directly harmful. Calling yourself an engineer, not a PE, without a a PE is not directly harmful, and the Constitution overrides state laws that claim otherwise. My money is on him in this one.

"Shouting fire" is a reference to Schenck v. US which has been overturned. It applied the "clear and present danger" standard. The current standard is "incitement to imminent lawless action" as articulated in Brandenburg v. Ohio.

Re: Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am an Engineer' in an Email to the Gov't

#140

Post by ghostly_s »

coupdejarnac wrote: post #62
musesum wrote: post #41

A friend grew an engineering company in Oregon from 200 employees to > 1000 employees. He took the company public and is an industry standard. His reward: getting charged with not following the letter of the law. He spent most of his life savings fighting back. Moral: do business in a different state.

If it was because of the engineering license issue, most or all states have similar laws.

I don't think the issue is the law, it's the seemingly capricious enforcement.
Post reply on HN