5 ms·

Shouldn't the bureaucracies be penalized, instead of the poor engineers? The engineers built the 90-degree layout specified by their clients! I wouldn't be su

by cs702 1y ago

Shouldn't the bureaucracies be penalized, instead of the poor engineers? The engineers built the 90-degree layout specified by their clients! I wouldn't be surprised if there's a paper trail documenting the engineers' objections, signed and notarized by the clients. It's hard for me to judge the engineers without knowing more.

strogonoff 1y ago
Sometimes we are paid to say “no”.
- cruffle_duffle 1y ago
  Depends entirely on the culture. Some cultures saying “no” is simply not what you do.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - strogonoff 1y ago
    That doesn’t sound like a good justification.
- teamonkey 1y ago
  More often we are paid to say “yes”
  - strogonoff 1y ago
    It might have been a bit of wishful thinking. Put it this way: sometimes a licensed engineer, who can lose the license for shoddy engineering, is paid to say “no”. Say “yes”, lose your license, no longer get paid. While there is no licensing in our industry, we can (should?) have our personal standards play a similar role.
    - dsr_ 1y ago
      That's the role of a professional standards organization: to protect the public. If that doesn't exist, you don't have protection for yourself, you only have your own ethics. It's more important, and also more dangerous.
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    Most of the work of professional engineers consists of being paid to say what everyone already knows or affirm that the default option is fine but is forced by the law to pay you to say on their behalf record. "the stormwater impacts of the proposed alterations to the site are negligible" "the foundation will be constructed with 3500psi concrete" And so on. A huge fraction of the industry is a money fire at the public's expense. It's on the same order as all the "the hospital paid what for gloves?" type stuff that only the worse of the worst will defend.
GuB-42 1y ago
It depends on what you expect from your engineers and how hierarchy works. It is a cultural thing I guess. Do you expect engineers to do what you ask them to do, no matter how stupid. If you do and your engineers execute your stupid orders, then you are at fault. It was your job to have common sense, ask the right people, etc... You failed. Now you may expect your engineers to call you and your stupid plans out, and if they didn't, it is their fault. They should have called you out and they didn't. They failed. In the west, we usually expect the latter, so engineers should certainly be penalized. In India, I don't know.
Enginerrrd 1y ago
No. I'm a licensed civil engineer in the US. The license comes with an explicit duty to the public, to uphold public safety. I am in responsible charge of the work I produce and personally liable for the safety of that work, in perpetuity, and it SHOULD be that way. Any plans that I produce are subject to that standard. India has a similar system for public works projects where a licensed engineer MUST supervise the work. Frankly, sometimes I think the software world would be a lot better off with a similar system.
- FinnKuhn 1y ago
  This doesn't look unsafe though, just inconvenient. Both in the US[1] and UK[2] you can find bridges with actual 90-degree angles. The one in India[3] is more like 75 degrees. [1]https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 [2]https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6 [3]https://maps.app.goo.gl/ikPSmLEGYwVJLqDz7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/ikPSmLEGYwVJLqDz7
  - renewiltord 1y ago
    Lmao that quayside bike lane is diabolical. Suicidal.
  - AnnikaL 1y ago
    The second link is in Canada.
    - Fluorescence 1y ago
      "New Westminster, British Columbia" lol. It looked nothing like the UK but at least they didn't plump for Colombia! Anyway, here is a real British one: https://maps.app.goo.gl/VAdfguBXNcDB74Yu5 https://maps.app.goo.gl/VAdfguBXNcDB74Yu5 I don't think it's that uncommon especially when crossing rivers because roads typically run along the river bank. A lot of roads and field boundaries were set down 1000s of years ago. The British way is that so long as you put up big 'ol black and white arrows then 90° is child's play, it could be a 180° hairpin. I don't drive much but I hated multi-story-car-park-spiral ramps that for four floors would be a 1560° turn at full lock in a small car. Feels like I am failing astronaut training as my stomach turns over.
theamk 1y ago
the article says: > the final result “is neither fulfilling the functional requirement nor safe for road users.” Customers can say all sorts of crazy things, they havo no knowledge of what's a good design or not. It's up to engineers to ensure design is safe. If an engineer knowigly signs-off on the design that is not safe, they deserve all the punishment.
rawgabbit 1y ago
This is another variant of the argument who should business corporations serve. On one side, you have the argument the client or stockholder is the only stakeholder. (An extreme example is the Sackler's Purdue Pharma peddling Oxycontin which delighted stockholders for a while). On the other side, you have the argument there are many stakeholders including customers, employees, and the community they live in. (An extreme example of this was Google who promised to do good for society and treat their developers as prized not commodities; now Google appears to swinging to the other direction.)
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

by cs702 1y ago

strogonoff 1y ago

Sometimes we are paid to say “no”.

cruffle_duffle 1y ago
Depends entirely on the culture. Some cultures saying “no” is simply not what you do.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- strogonoff 1y ago
  That doesn’t sound like a good justification.
teamonkey 1y ago
More often we are paid to say “yes”
- strogonoff 1y ago
  It might have been a bit of wishful thinking. Put it this way: sometimes a licensed engineer, who can lose the license for shoddy engineering, is paid to say “no”. Say “yes”, lose your license, no longer get paid. While there is no licensing in our industry, we can (should?) have our personal standards play a similar role.
  - dsr_ 1y ago
    That's the role of a professional standards organization: to protect the public. If that doesn't exist, you don't have protection for yourself, you only have your own ethics. It's more important, and also more dangerous.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  Most of the work of professional engineers consists of being paid to say what everyone already knows or affirm that the default option is fine but is forced by the law to pay you to say on their behalf record. "the stormwater impacts of the proposed alterations to the site are negligible" "the foundation will be constructed with 3500psi concrete" And so on. A huge fraction of the industry is a money fire at the public's expense. It's on the same order as all the "the hospital paid what for gloves?" type stuff that only the worse of the worst will defend.

GuB-42 1y ago

It depends on what you expect from your engineers and how hierarchy works. It is a cultural thing I guess. Do you expect engineers to do what you ask them to do, no matter how stupid. If you do and your engineers execute your stupid orders, then you are at fault. It was your job to have common sense, ask the right people, etc... You failed. Now you may expect your engineers to call you and your stupid plans out, and if they didn't, it is their fault. They should have called you out and they didn't. They failed. In the west, we usually expect the latter, so engineers should certainly be penalized. In India, I don't know.

Enginerrrd 1y ago

No. I'm a licensed civil engineer in the US. The license comes with an explicit duty to the public, to uphold public safety. I am in responsible charge of the work I produce and personally liable for the safety of that work, in perpetuity, and it SHOULD be that way. Any plans that I produce are subject to that standard. India has a similar system for public works projects where a licensed engineer MUST supervise the work. Frankly, sometimes I think the software world would be a lot better off with a similar system.

FinnKuhn 1y ago
This doesn't look unsafe though, just inconvenient. Both in the US[1] and UK[2] you can find bridges with actual 90-degree angles. The one in India[3] is more like 75 degrees. [1]https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 [2]https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6 [3]https://maps.app.goo.gl/ikPSmLEGYwVJLqDz7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/ikPSmLEGYwVJLqDz7
- renewiltord 1y ago
  Lmao that quayside bike lane is diabolical. Suicidal.
- AnnikaL 1y ago
  The second link is in Canada.
  - Fluorescence 1y ago
    "New Westminster, British Columbia" lol. It looked nothing like the UK but at least they didn't plump for Colombia! Anyway, here is a real British one: https://maps.app.goo.gl/VAdfguBXNcDB74Yu5 https://maps.app.goo.gl/VAdfguBXNcDB74Yu5 I don't think it's that uncommon especially when crossing rivers because roads typically run along the river bank. A lot of roads and field boundaries were set down 1000s of years ago. The British way is that so long as you put up big 'ol black and white arrows then 90° is child's play, it could be a 180° hairpin. I don't drive much but I hated multi-story-car-park-spiral ramps that for four floors would be a 1560° turn at full lock in a small car. Feels like I am failing astronaut training as my stomach turns over.

theamk 1y ago

the article says: > the final result “is neither fulfilling the functional requirement nor safe for road users.” Customers can say all sorts of crazy things, they havo no knowledge of what's a good design or not. It's up to engineers to ensure design is safe. If an engineer knowigly signs-off on the design that is not safe, they deserve all the punishment.

rawgabbit 1y ago

This is another variant of the argument who should business corporations serve. On one side, you have the argument the client or stockholder is the only stakeholder. (An extreme example is the Sackler's Purdue Pharma peddling Oxycontin which delighted stockholders for a while). On the other side, you have the argument there are many stakeholders including customers, employees, and the community they live in. (An extreme example of this was Google who promised to do good for society and treat their developers as prized not commodities; now Google appears to swinging to the other direction.)

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]