4 ms·

> only takes one PLC engineer to connect the two sides of the network for their own expedience The fuzzy way we depreciate the term Engineer shows up in situat

> only takes one PLC engineer to connect the two sides of the network for their own expedience The fuzzy way we depreciate the term Engineer shows up in situations like this. An actual Professional Engineer, with a state issued license, would be assuming liability for their actions, and would know better than to bypass an air gap in this manner. Someone who uses the term willy-nilly, as most programmers seem to do these days, has no such restraints, nor caution, nor deep consideration of consequences.

mindslight 2mo ago
As a former professional embedded design engineer, I'm not terribly swayed by arguments that "real engineering" involves licenses from the state. Nor do I think that personal liability is a great avenue for moving the needle here, as that would really just be creating indirect regulation through insurance companies (with a specific focus on what the Professional Engineer might be found liable for), while creating an ongoing tax (the insurance premiums) for anyone involved in such work. Why not just write and mandate those codes directly? something like the National Electric Code but focused on best practices for setting up secure control networks. (And while the NEC does enter into the PE dynamic, there is plenty of work subject to the NEC but that doesn't involve a PE)