4 ms·
It's marketing. "Engineer" shouldn't be a protected designation. It depends on the state: see this vice article on a licensing board getting shot down[0]. Pro
by djoldman 5y ago
It's marketing.
"Engineer" shouldn't be a protected designation. It depends on the state: see this vice article on a licensing board getting shot down[0].
Professionals want to give themselves the most serious and qualified-sounding names they can.
Unfortunately, this article appears to be another in a long line of longform trolling designed to stimulate emotional response and drive clicks without any real substance..
[0]https://www.vice.com/en/article/yw798m/oregon-unconstitutionally-fined-a-man-dollar500-for-saying-i-am-an-engineer-federal-judge-rules https://www.vice.com/en/article/yw798m/oregon-unconstitution...
- gentleman11 5y agoEngineer is a protected title in many places because non engineers are not legally allowed to do certain safety critical work. If you got your way, some random who went to a bridge design boot camp would be designing the bridges in town
- khalladay 5y agoNo... they wouldn't. Unless the only thing keeping unqualified people from doing safety critical work is the job title they give themselves.
- atoav 5y agoI am currently learning 9046 norms each with 30 to 300 pages of densely packed text only about the LV electrical grid. I have to know these norms to be allowed to do anything meaningful. If I don't know them I could still do stuff, but the likelyhood of landing in jail because what I planned started a fire or killed someone would be very real. Going to jail because you managed to replicate a SQL injection that everybody and their dog knows since the 90s is something I really would like to see in software engineering. Because you know: engineers are personally liable for the decisions they take and for the things they should have known but didn't.