Not without resistance.
Ohm, my. Watts wrong with you two?
This thread has gone off the rails.
There was a physicist at Cleveland State University who used to regularly appear on Quirks and Quarks who successfully challenged a ticket for red light violation by demonstrating that a person with normal reflexives and normal brakes, traveling at the speed limit, could not possibly stop in time at the intersection in question (on Euclid Ave., IIRC). True he did not call himself an engineer, but you don’t need to be a civil engineer, or even a physicist to add a couple of timings and compare them to the length of the yellow. In that sense his qualifications were irrelevant. Even a judge could understand his calculations.
With respect, that’s nonsensical. Of course there are software engineers: you can get degrees in it from accredited universities, which definitely counts as “recognizing.” There are also professional organizations and a variety of exams that recognize software engineering as a legitimate engineering discipline, including the Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology, IEEE, and others. (Computer Science and Software Engineering are different disciplines, although in many institutions the faculty and programs overlap.) Heck, MIT itself has a doctoral program in Computational Science and Engineering.
Yes, software engineering is somewhat unlike physical engineering, but the same can be said of many engineering disciplines. There are also numerous practices in common and recognized architectural and design principles in software engineering. While it’s true that software development isn’t as formalized as some of the other engineering fields, it’s also a few hundred years newer than them, and the underlying technologies are changing fast enough that we’re still determining what does and doesn’t work. Developing the strategies by which software should be developed is as much engineering as applying them, and there’s no shortage of research, measurable data, and practice around that. Formalizing practices has been under way for some time; Capers Jones was doing research around measurability in software metrics decades ago, much of which has been institutionalized in the practice.
For what it’s worth, though, the Oregon engineering licensing board does not license software engineers, nor prohibit them from calling themselves engineers unless they are doing so deceptively to imply they are one of the licensed disciplines.
I stand by what I said. Read the book I referenced.
You mean the book the specifically refers to people who write code as “engineers?”
Can you answer my question? Are Railroad Engineers - Engineers, or do you demand they be called something else also, as they aren’t 'real" engineers?
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=8946293
“MATS JÄRLSTRÖM’S SIX-year crusade to make yellow traffic lights safer for drivers could soon pay off.In late 2019, an Institute of Transpor-tation Engineers appeals panel agreed with the Oregon consultant’s claims that a widely used formula for setting the timing of yellow traffic lights doesn’t account for the extra time a driver might need to safely turn through an intersection”
Truly puns are the lowest form of humour. But rather than engage, I will go to my quiet place.
O-O-H-H-M-M
I think the court got it right. Yes, states have broad power to regulate commercial speech and the primary rationale is a sort of consumer protection so that people are not misleading or outright committing fraud on the public or other consumers. I think Oregon has every right to say that if you use the title “engineer” in conjunction with a profession in order to make money, that you have to meet X, Y, and Z criteria.
But to enforce it in this context, there is no commercial speech as it is not for money making purposes. There are no consumers to protect. It is violation of the First Amendment to prohibit someone from using a truthful term in a conversation. The fact that he made the statement to the Board who was reviewing traffic light signaling makes no difference. They are a sophisticated party who can take his expertise for what it is worth and do their own calculations. It’s not like if this guy was really an Oregon certified engineer that they would have blindly taken his advice.
When he submits this complex math to the Board, IMHO it is part of the petitioning the government for redress that he be permitted to also state any relevant information as to why his petition should be given credence. And saying that he is an engineer, with its implication that he has training in math, is part of that process. Importantly, it is a true statement.
I just cannot imagine any rational government interest in suppressing this speech in non-commercial contexts.
Concur. This seems little different to me than so-called stolen valor act of 2005, which were ruled unconstitutional years ago. I’m surprised Oregon tried to push the issue in a case where he wasn’t offering his services in exchange for money, or even explicitly claiming a title like PE.
The Board just wanted to shut him up and fuck him up, and nearly succeeded.
Technically, then, can a train engineer says that is his profession?
Only if they have those pinstriped hats.
Dude, you’ve been asking Hari that question for two years!
What part of “I don’t have a case, but I can’t admit I’m wrong” don’t you understand?! 
He never answered.
Because you see, the Feds license Amtrak train engineers, so Oregon would be shit out of luck.
I would love to see them try.
So yeah, I have a case.
I know he never answered. I was needling him, not you.
I too am curious as to whether the federal government has been causing me to commit a crime every time I referred to the job they hired me for 34 years ago.
Similar case in North Carolina
Wayne Nutt, a retired engineer in North Carolina, just wanted to help out his neighbors. After he testified about a piping system that allegedly flooded homes, the North Carolina Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors sent him a letter claiming he’d broken the law. The crime? Practicing engineering without a license.