4 ms·

To all the chemical engineers: (And computer engineers for that matter) Your time is coming. The rest of the hard engineering disciplines have had their failur

To all the chemical engineers: (And computer engineers for that matter) Your time is coming. The rest of the hard engineering disciplines have had their failures and now we have licenses and accountability. The amount of damage one bridge can do is limited, but the amount of destruction caused by endocrine disrupting chemicals and authoritarian enabling surveillance tools is unlimited. The civil engineer will be held to account for his failures. Hopefully, soon, the same will be true for the likes of your professions

skrebbel 4y ago
I agree that some more pubic accountability for chemical engineers and programmers would be great, but I hate the hostile, anti-intellectual "us good, chemists bad" vibe with which you say it. There's no need to threaten people. There's chemists who make the world better and chemists who make the world worse, like with every other profession.
- southerntofu 4y ago
  > the hostile, anti-intellectual "us good, chemists bad" vibe with which you say it. I personally didn't get that from the parent comment. It's just really weird (from an outsider/alien perspective) that in many sectors of the corporate mafia like in the chemical/IT industry obvious and sometimes intentional malicious schemes (which result in actual deaths) are either rewarded or ignored... when in many other branches harmless errors can get you kicked from your job (eg. in restaurants/shops). It's not contempt to point that out. If you believe in the idea that there should be a social contract by which we are bound, the social contract must apply to everyone fairly. So why does it often not apply to cops, judges, landlords and some sectors of the engineering community? > There's chemists who make the world better and chemists who make the world worse, like with every other profession. True, but like in every other profession, it's very hard to make money if you're really trying to make the world better, and i do mean any money (as in find a job at all).
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  >have had their failures and now we have licenses and accountability. Read it. We made those engineers accountable and should have done the same for the others. Please review what it means to make a threat, as nothing stated is remotely a "threat". Sounds weakly middle management, BTW. It is a notice that soon there will be accountability. If you are an engineer making the world a better place, then there won't be much to account for will there?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
gruez 4y ago
>The civil engineer will be held to account for his failures. Hopefully, soon, the same will be true for the likes of your professions So some mid level manager/engineer gets to be the fall guy and all the executives gets away scot free?
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  Try to engage the situation. Executives are all the same. They are looking to sell something. Engineers make the world. Be accountable to yourself and your fellow man. We can deny the CEOs of the world our knowledge
rasz 4y ago
>The civil engineer will be held to account for his failures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_Universi... search jail : 0 found
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
salawat 4y ago
I'm totally okay with this to be honest. I've been waiting on it. I'm tired of software companies that just go hire another shmuck.
thereisnospork 4y ago
What is it, exactly, that you think chemical engineers do? Blaming them is like blaming the plumbers' union for Flint Michigan's drinking water.
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  That is not a good analogy. But I will add that professional chemist licensing should be required and revocable
  - thereisnospork 4y ago
    Chemists have nothing directly to do with toxicity and environmental effects either, they design and/or select chemicals to do a job. (The engineers make the aforementioned chemicals in bulk/cheaply/efficiently. Not that they never screw up, but the implied dereliction of ethical behavior you are insinuating doesn't exist and is frankly insulting. So yes, it is a valid analogy. Just as it would be equally valid [read: not valid at all] to damn the software engineering profession for the sins of AutoDesk, or whomever your villain du jour is.
    - upsidesinclude 4y ago
      If you do this work then you are intelligent enough to determine something about the chemicals you are mass producing. If nothing is known about them, should you be making them? There is your dilemma, I suppose. Claiming ignorance as a shield against accountability is a pretty weak stance. Just doing what you're told doesn't go over well either, if we can use history as a guide. My statement is intended to denounce those among you that have no concern with what their work will wrought in the world. If you can stand behind your actions then you aren't the target. Side note: most of software is written by hacks (read: google copypasters) that don't deserve the title engineer and do a disservice to actual programmers. No one cares about Autodesk other than Architects. The concern is Palantir, Facebook, Google, Cellebright, NSO Group
sneak 4y ago
The state that benefits from authoritarian surveillance is the same state that issues professional licenses.
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  No argument here. But the state is not one entity. Licensing for many professions is bullshit. Licensing for engineering requires mentorship and certification by non-government societies in the US. They determine the amount of rigor to join their group and hold the status as a professional engineer. Everything after that is just registration, which confirms you have evidence of the the prior
amelius 4y ago
That all depends on the amount of lobbying going on.
chaosbutters314 4y ago
lol, ok. sure, whatever. as a ChemE, we have already made so much progress on making plants blow up less, spilling toxic chemicals into waterways, stopping destroying the ozone, make food safer, .... you maybe need to go talk to chemists who make this. ChemE just mass produce what the chemist makes. but the chemist just makes what the business needs and the business you makes what the consumer wants. so oh wait, this is on you for being an irresponsible consumer. don't buy it and we won't make it. also, north America and the west have already done impressive reforms contrary to Asia which really needs to learn environmentalism
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  > ...so much progress... Great, love that for you. When your company is ruining the world you should take a stand. > ... irresponsible consumer... No. Won't accept that shirking of responsibility. Consumers expect that the product isn't poison. We expect that planes fly and cars don't explode. It isn't reasonable to say that consumers want nonstick poison. They were sold a product that was "better" than the alternatives. They believed that would include not being poison.

skrebbel 4y ago

I agree that some more pubic accountability for chemical engineers and programmers would be great, but I hate the hostile, anti-intellectual "us good, chemists bad" vibe with which you say it. There's no need to threaten people. There's chemists who make the world better and chemists who make the world worse, like with every other profession.

southerntofu 4y ago
> the hostile, anti-intellectual "us good, chemists bad" vibe with which you say it. I personally didn't get that from the parent comment. It's just really weird (from an outsider/alien perspective) that in many sectors of the corporate mafia like in the chemical/IT industry obvious and sometimes intentional malicious schemes (which result in actual deaths) are either rewarded or ignored... when in many other branches harmless errors can get you kicked from your job (eg. in restaurants/shops). It's not contempt to point that out. If you believe in the idea that there should be a social contract by which we are bound, the social contract must apply to everyone fairly. So why does it often not apply to cops, judges, landlords and some sectors of the engineering community? > There's chemists who make the world better and chemists who make the world worse, like with every other profession. True, but like in every other profession, it's very hard to make money if you're really trying to make the world better, and i do mean any money (as in find a job at all).
upsidesinclude 4y ago
>have had their failures and now we have licenses and accountability. Read it. We made those engineers accountable and should have done the same for the others. Please review what it means to make a threat, as nothing stated is remotely a "threat". Sounds weakly middle management, BTW. It is a notice that soon there will be accountability. If you are an engineer making the world a better place, then there won't be much to account for will there?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

gruez 4y ago

>The civil engineer will be held to account for his failures. Hopefully, soon, the same will be true for the likes of your professions So some mid level manager/engineer gets to be the fall guy and all the executives gets away scot free?

upsidesinclude 4y ago
Try to engage the situation. Executives are all the same. They are looking to sell something. Engineers make the world. Be accountable to yourself and your fellow man. We can deny the CEOs of the world our knowledge

rasz 4y ago

>The civil engineer will be held to account for his failures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_Universi... search jail : 0 found

upsidesinclude 4y ago

salawat 4y ago

I'm totally okay with this to be honest. I've been waiting on it. I'm tired of software companies that just go hire another shmuck.

thereisnospork 4y ago

What is it, exactly, that you think chemical engineers do? Blaming them is like blaming the plumbers' union for Flint Michigan's drinking water.

upsidesinclude 4y ago
That is not a good analogy. But I will add that professional chemist licensing should be required and revocable
- thereisnospork 4y ago
  Chemists have nothing directly to do with toxicity and environmental effects either, they design and/or select chemicals to do a job. (The engineers make the aforementioned chemicals in bulk/cheaply/efficiently. Not that they never screw up, but the implied dereliction of ethical behavior you are insinuating doesn't exist and is frankly insulting. So yes, it is a valid analogy. Just as it would be equally valid [read: not valid at all] to damn the software engineering profession for the sins of AutoDesk, or whomever your villain du jour is.
  - upsidesinclude 4y ago
    If you do this work then you are intelligent enough to determine something about the chemicals you are mass producing. If nothing is known about them, should you be making them? There is your dilemma, I suppose. Claiming ignorance as a shield against accountability is a pretty weak stance. Just doing what you're told doesn't go over well either, if we can use history as a guide. My statement is intended to denounce those among you that have no concern with what their work will wrought in the world. If you can stand behind your actions then you aren't the target. Side note: most of software is written by hacks (read: google copypasters) that don't deserve the title engineer and do a disservice to actual programmers. No one cares about Autodesk other than Architects. The concern is Palantir, Facebook, Google, Cellebright, NSO Group

sneak 4y ago

The state that benefits from authoritarian surveillance is the same state that issues professional licenses.

upsidesinclude 4y ago
No argument here. But the state is not one entity. Licensing for many professions is bullshit. Licensing for engineering requires mentorship and certification by non-government societies in the US. They determine the amount of rigor to join their group and hold the status as a professional engineer. Everything after that is just registration, which confirms you have evidence of the the prior

amelius 4y ago

That all depends on the amount of lobbying going on.

chaosbutters314 4y ago

lol, ok. sure, whatever. as a ChemE, we have already made so much progress on making plants blow up less, spilling toxic chemicals into waterways, stopping destroying the ozone, make food safer, .... you maybe need to go talk to chemists who make this. ChemE just mass produce what the chemist makes. but the chemist just makes what the business needs and the business you makes what the consumer wants. so oh wait, this is on you for being an irresponsible consumer. don't buy it and we won't make it. also, north America and the west have already done impressive reforms contrary to Asia which really needs to learn environmentalism

upsidesinclude 4y ago
> ...so much progress... Great, love that for you. When your company is ruining the world you should take a stand. > ... irresponsible consumer... No. Won't accept that shirking of responsibility. Consumers expect that the product isn't poison. We expect that planes fly and cars don't explode. It isn't reasonable to say that consumers want nonstick poison. They were sold a product that was "better" than the alternatives. They believed that would include not being poison.