What a bunch of pricks. Vogons couldn't have done any worse than the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying.
In this case, the guy had training as an electric engineer, but was commenting outside of his proven realm of expertise. However, he wasn't deceiving the public by representing himself as an engineer-for-hire, though, which I think makes it forgivable. I just found the free speech ruling to be over-broad.
Let's take this case as an example. Anyone can send a letter saying "The traffic light is too short; here's the math to prove it". Saying "I'm an engineer" might help you get that letter noticed, but it would almost certainly be illegal to reprogram the light without a professional engineer's sign-off independent of that letter no matter the person's qualifications. The state was never at risk of acting on his advice no matter how he represented himself. So why not let him say it?
(For context: I work in the field and am not a registered engineer, though I studied it in university. I would never call myself an engineer)
What do you call yourself?
I have a degree in EE, but there's a 0% chance I could safely design electrical equipment. In school they taught me how to analyze circuits, but I know nothing of the electrical code, let alone practical matters like mechanical stresses on wires. Without somebody to learn from, I would learn a lot of things the hard way—when the design fails.
I am a licensed professional engineer with a B.Sc. in EE, so I've gone through every part of the process for designing electrical equipment except for acquiring work experience in that subfield. The only thing preventing me from signing off on an electrical drawing is that I do not believe I am qualified.
Now of course that doesn't mean that you can just start building bridges as a non-accredited engineer, I expect the courts would look unkindly on you in a negligence lawsuit if your company had engineers that couldn't demonstrate their professional qualifications and development.
This is seen as a problem and the professional bodies are pushing more states to adopt mandatory registration, so we'll see more of that in the next few years, but it's not like Australia is a land where bridges fall down weekly without mandatory registration.
Also amusing that it's a Swedish person fighting with the American mindset (My Constitutions!). It's very rare to see those.
It takes ~8 years to fulfill the requirements to acquire a professional license. It's not worth the risk of being caught.
That’s not an insult, I’m sure you’re quite skilled. But outside of the software industry “engineer” is a term that signifies certification.
I've always wondered this: why are software engineers allowed to use the title "Engineer" but aren't at all required to do FE or any certification?
It's very strange. I always thought certification was about being able to be employed as an engineer, not use the title.
Things get trickier with software as well - with many engineering disciplines, the public can be placed in harm's way by the malpractice of engineering - that's why many civil firms require PE's. In other areas, it's less desirable - for defense contractors, many purposely avoid PE's due to our ethical obligations around harming the public.
Surrounding software, I think a major part of it is just that the laws haven't caught up with the times. NCEES now has a Software PE available but no clue about the contents of the exam. It seems like a tricky one to test for.
Near as I could tell, it was a rent-seeking and exclusionary agenda of some entrenched parties. The proposed exam requirement for software engineers didn't go anywhere.
It has little to do with languages and frameworks and more on principles and practices.
I'm biased as my undergrad was one of the first to become certified.
My CS program was in my school's college of engineering, which had a much more rigorous application process than the lib arts school. The first two years were essentially the same for CS, CE, MechE, ChemE, etc - lots of math and physics.
Maybe I'm just a bit sore. While society doesn't stereotype us as badly as before - the typical low status nerd - most of that improvement is due to SV engineers making such good money. But it still feels like we're not respected the same as other higher paying careers like law, medicine, or even other types of engineers. I mean I've actually had managers who probably make less than me assign me remedial tasks like fixing their laptop or resetting their password.
It's a shame, because it's only one of them that I feel will stand the test of time.
Most “actual engineers” do trivial shit just like most software engineers/developers.
But I do agree that developing software is usually more of an art than a science and a lot of software engineers just make business apps where not much of the engineering background is required.
And so dental tourism is a thing.
While yes the quality will be very high, that's not summation of all that matters.
If I am contesting traffic ticket, I might accept a lawyer without $300k in student debt. Same if I want a tooth cleaning or a strep test.
By all means have bodies of accreditation but don't force me to use them, especially in common low-risk scenarios.
The giving-medical-advice thing was a dig at a formerly popular television host.
That said, a doctor misrepresenting themself as a physician and giving medical advice where not licensed to do practice medicine, as done by Dr. Phil, is wildly unethical.
There are however many, many more professions which require specialty training and are protected: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regprof/index.cf...
No, hats off to the a-holes on the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying. They need to be humiliated even more thoroughly than this. This needs to be national and international front-page news. Let these petty tyrants know that heroes exist.
This story keeps popping up with updates. What a great saga.
And, of course, Mr. Järlström deserves all the kudos, free beer, pizza -- a few $$ that might help defray costs? Where to send?
They'd do better to change it for a countdown just like they do with the crosswalk sign that counts down from 15 seconds or something before going to a solid amber for a couple of seconds before going red. They'd also do well to have some kind of markers on the road indicating a safe distance from the traffic lights to come to a stop in an average family car (whatever that means) in current weather conditions.
However, behaviour adjusts as we become complacent, and it's in our nature to become complacent with that which we are acclimated to every day. We definitely need some consideration for that factor and we definitely need a design that goes further to ensuring that people aren't tempted to run the lights. The temptation to run them "just this once" because "I'm late" or "I've already sat 3 changes in this line up and I'm pissed off with waiting" or "I'm sure I can beat the red" needs to be removed.
2. He claimed to be a P.Eng, without being one.
This undermines the profession, at loss to the public. I can go around, giving unsolicited medical advice all I want. I can't go around, giving unsolicited medical advice, while claiming to be a MD - and for good reason.
[Citation needed]
He claimed to be an engineer. The ruling preserved license requirements to claim yourself a "professional engineer" and "registered professional engineer" [0].
[0] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/01/02/oregon_engineer_lic...
It's not an unreasonable position.
Perhaps a person who is trained as an electrical engineer and who has a history of employment as a researcher and developer of audio electronics (in Oregon) should not think of or refer to themselves as an 'engineer' unless they are licensed in the jurisdiction they happen to be in, but this is a problem with a simple fix, and it is a problem unique to Oregon.
It does? I've seen really good engineering done by people who don't even have degrees in engineering (or degrees at all, for that matter). Contrariwise, utter disasters by people who were supposed to be incredibly professional.
For the most part, being a PE is about liability, and the technical stuff is there for show. It has nothing to do with "undermining the profession", it's all about who can sue whom when something falls over.