They also didn't start delving into DEI madness in 2010...neglecting the engineering to chase the "diversity" ghost

Yep, I had writeups from those flame wars. They *REALLY* did not want it discussed. Governors Brown and Kotek continued the pay-to-play system, which is what lost Oregon the Ohio CHIPs foundry campus (before they realized that Biden wasn't going to pay out CHIPs act at all).

All one needs to see this is to be employed at Intel in June, when every single monitor becomes rainbows and the rainbow flag flies on campus every month.

And?

Not to mention the millions spent on DEI hiring of marginal people based only on demographics.

He did, on the promise of the Biden CHIPs act money- the employees ballooned to 145,000 worldwide by October 2022.

Due to CHIPs act not coming through as planned, in December 2022 they started rounds of layoffs, which Lu Tan is continuing

Rare earths are not rare. However, processing rare earths are very polluting. By buying these materials from China, Europe doesn't need this polluting industry within it's borders. China can pollute itself for Europe's benefit.

If Europe doesn't want to deal with China, then it either needs to find another source or start processing rare earths within it's own territory and deal with the pollution itself.

Here is an interesting Wikipedia article that might lend another perspective on this discussion of semantics.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

When in doubt, you can always refer to legal definitions and how different jurisdictions treat this issue in their legal systems. I have not heard anyone dispute the legitimacy of anyone who is officially licensed or registered in their jurisdiction, especially seeing how clearly defined the licensing/registration process is in those places that observe one. Of course, this is not to devalue the capabilities or education of someone who is not registered or licensed but it's clear that these people fall into more of a grey area, not regulated, which becomes subjective and I suppose this is the question underlying this discussion.

As to whether using the title is wrong, I would say anyone holding themselves out as a Professional, licensed or registered engineer when they are not, is out of bounds and probably even breaking the law. For everyone else, we're in the grey area.

Toward the bottom of there is an paragraph under "United States" that discusses legal protection of the term "professional engineer" and an industrial exemption for people to be called engineers under certain circumstances where their work is internal to a business entity that qualifies as an "exempt organization" and some tests for direct supervision are met. I think this might be where you see creative "engineer" titles arising.

Interesting that Wyoming would be the first state in the US to adopt licensing requirements because I would have thought of Wyoming to be less receptive to regulation than say New York or Massachusetts.

So am I an engineer? If licensed or registered - unequivocally yes. If not - maybe. Depends on circumstances.

Here is an interesting Wikipedia article that might lend another perspective on this discussion of semantics.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

When in doubt, you can always refer to legal definitions and how different jurisdictions treat this issue in their legal systems. I have not heard anyone dispute the legitimacy of anyone who is officially licensed or registered in their jurisdiction, especially seeing how clearly defined the licensing/registration process is in those places that observe one. Of course, this is not to devalue the capabilities or education of someone who is not registered or licensed but it's clear that these people fall into more of a grey area, not regulated, which becomes subjective and I suppose this is the question underlying this discussion.

As to whether using the title is wrong, I would say anyone holding themselves out as a Professional, licensed or registered engineer when they are not, is out of bounds and probably even breaking the law. For everyone else, we're in the grey area.

Toward the bottom of there is an paragraph under "United States" that discusses legal protection of the term "professional engineer" and an industrial exemption for people to be called engineers under certain circumstances where their work is internal to a business entity that qualifies as an "exempt organization" and some tests for direct supervision are met. I think this might be where you see creative "engineer" titles arising.

Interesting that Wyoming would be the first state in the US to adopt licensing requirements because I would have thought of Wyoming to be less receptive to regulation than say New York or Massachusetts.

So am I an engineer? If licensed or registered - unequivocally yes. If not - maybe. Depends on circumstances.

2024 was when employers started implementing return to office across the entire economy. They also started pushing AI everywhere. And, they continued layoffs that started in 2023. Of course this made employees worse off.

The only objective measure of student performance that can't easily be cheated are standardized tests. Universities need to bring back the SAT or ACT. Schools need to limit admissions to those students with the top grades. Right now, it's far too easy to cheat the system and bring in students who can't do the work while denying good students who can do the work and refuse to cheat.

Colleges can collect ACT/SAT scores, high school grades, recommendations, and essays. We've seen grade inflation over the past few decades where students can all easily get A's regardless of whether they actually deserve them or not. Students can easily cheat on recommendations and essays. The only objective measure of a student that's not easily cheated are the ACT or SAT. Removing those requirements means that universities have exposed themselves to students interested in cheating their way into college. The result are universities accepting a group of mediocre students who can't do the work and denying good students who can do the work and refuse to cheat.

Lack of planning? All private companies, departments, and individual teams plan for the projects that they implement. All public city, county, and state organizations plan for the projects in their area. Decentralized planning may look like no planning to someone from China. But, that's certainly far from true. There's lots of planning going on. It's not controlled from some central location. One of the benefits of this model is that it tends not to overbuild and overspend when the need isn't necessary, such as what happens with central planning. Local municipalities and businesses tend to build what they need and are economically punished when they overbuild.

China has abject poverty in most of the country next to places that are wildly rich that are used for propaganda videos. In comparison, the US has done a much better job spreading the wealth from coast to coast.

Saudi doesn’t have its own supply of good tech labor. China does. China doesn’t have the same incentive to create these enclaves as Saudi.