patrick.net

I don't know what JD stands for, but as for the second graph, it makes no sense. Computer Science is and engineering discipline. It's software engineering. I, a software developer, am by definition an engineer.

Also, engineering includes dozens of diverse kinds including mechanical, electrical, computer, software, chemical, petroleum, materials processing, just to name a few. Even computer engineering and software engineering are completely different fields.

In any case, if the point of this post is that we have too many engineers in our society, don't worry. In a few more decades, we'll have none. Instead of producing multitudes of wealth like engineers, Americans will simply play zero-sum games in the financial industry and Chinda will make and distribute all wealth as it sees fit. America's reign as a superpower will end and we'll be in effect economic slaves to Chinda, the sole remaining superpower.

As for all the rednecks who were afraid they'd have to learn Spanish, they'll find out how much harder it is to learn Hindi when they are forced to learn it to do anything in society.

Dan8267 says

I don't know what JD stands for

In America, it stands for Juris Doctor whereas in Britain and other nations, it's LLB, Bachelors of Law.

Since in the US, lawyers get trained as a postgraduate degree, their egos couldn't handle a 2nd bachelors so they opted for a more elitist-friendly moniker.

JD: Doctor of Jurisprudence; i.e. a master's degree that is a pre-requisite in most states for taking the bar exam to become a lawyer.

"Software engineers" are somewhat better than "social engineers." Neither require much of a math and science background, unlike most hard engineering fields. That means they are susceptible to competition from people taking it on as second careers, unlike the hard engineering fields that pretty much require a dedicated course load in the late teens to early 20's and then work in the field as the first career. Of course, to be really good at it, "software engineering" and "social engineering" require raw talent.

Reality says

JD: Doctor of Jurisprudence; i.e. a master's degree that is a pre-requisite in most states for taking the bar exam to become a lawyer.

In Britain, that Masters degree in law is called an LLM.

And likewise, that's also the name for a 2nd degree in law, in the US, after the first JD.

And then, there's an even more advanced degree, the LLD or the JSD, which is the pinnacle in legal studies, if that means anything.

Dan8267 said: I, a software developer, am by definition an engineer.
Hmmmm.... By that same logic, so is CaptainShuddup.

Reality says

unlike the hard engineering fields that pretty much require a dedicated course load in the late teens to early 20's and then work in the field as the first career

Traditional engineering programs are essentially majors built around applied chemistry and physics, with a lot of emphasis on applied math.

The primary areas are chemical, electrical, mechanical, civil, and then the offshoots like aerospace, nuclear, material science/solid state, industrial, and so forth.

Industrial, however, is a lot more like computer science & econometrics, as its primary function is in operations research which is nowadays, more relevant for ppl in finance than in manufacturing.

Rin says

In Britain, that Masters degree in law is called an LLM.

And likewise, that's also the name for a 2nd degree in law, in the US, after the first JD.

And then, there's an even more advanced degree, the LLD or the JSD, which is the pinnacle in legal studies, if that means anything.

I know what you are trying to say: JD is the legal field equivalent to a RN degree, the equivalent in the real engineering fields (a Bachelor's) wouldn't even qualify one for a license to practice, but only becoming a lab rat. LOL. Perhaps that explains why more youths pursue JD instead of M.Eng., when education is expensive.

Reality says

"Software engineers" are somewhat better than "social engineers." Neither require much of a math and science background, unlike most hard engineering fields

Obviously you've never taken a course in Queueing Theory.

Of course, all good software engineers are interested in math and science and tend to take physics and calculus in high school, abstract and linear algebra in college, and other math and science courses.

Reality says

That means they are susceptible to competition from people taking it on as second careers, unlike the hard engineering fields that pretty much require a dedicated course load in the late teens to early 20's and then work in the field as the first career.

I think the main form of protectionism in careers are legal requirements like the bar for lawyers and the residency requirements of medical practitioners. You don't need a license to perform software development. If you did, software developers would get paid as much as lawyers and doctors.

But yes, there are a lot of people in the software development field that shouldn't be.

EBGuy says

Dan8267 said: I, a software developer, am by definition an engineer.

Hmmmm.... By that same logic, so is CaptainShuddup.

The difference is that I am a good software developer (see my previous sentence in this post).

Dan8267 says

Obviously you've never taken a course in Queueing Theory.

Of course, all good software engineers are interested in math and science and tend to take physics and calculus in high school, abstract and linear algebra in college, and other math and science courses.

I went through all of that in my youth. In my experience, the differentiation came when differential equations and Shroedinger's Equations came along: those who could hack it became hard engineers, those who couldn't settled for "software engineering."

Dan8267 says

I think the main form of protectionism in careers are legal requirements like the bar for lawyers and the residency requirements of medical practitioners. You don't need a license to perform software development. If you did, software developers would get paid as much as lawyers and doctors.

But yes, there are a lot of people in the software development field that shouldn't be.

The talented software engineers are devising systems that will probably severely undermine both the legal and the medical professions.

Folks, we shouldn't be in some pissing contest ... on whether or not, Computer Science is at par with let's say Industrial Engineering/Operations Research or vice versa.

Instead, we should be ripping on idiot MBA-ologists, who'd ruined STEM work in corporate America.

Right now, aside from the Navy's Nuclear Engineering program, I wouldn't recommend anyone, from studying engineering, moving forwards, thanks to corporate America.

JDs will be the end of many professions. They are locusts and won't stop until every dime can be squeezed, in the form of professional fees, out of every other profession on the planet. They have such a powerful lobby that there is little fear of actionable legal malpractice. There's no such thing as a spurious suit if they can extract cash out of the other side. Even if the cash comes solely from the desire to just make them go away. You see it all the time in the medical profession. Someone has an absurd claim that would NEVER win in court. Insurance companies often elect to throw the other side some money just to make them go away (because they don't want to have to pay their own outrageous legal fees to fight it). JDs know this, so there's no such thing as a groundless suit. JDs are nothing short of parasites.

Rin says

Folks, we shouldn't be in some pissing contest ... on whether or not, Computer Science is at par with let's say Industrial Engineering/Operations Research or vice versa.

Instead, we should be ripping on idiot MBA-ologists, who'd ruined STEM work in corporate America.

True. Any decent engineer in any engineering field has great respect for the other fields. There are many scientific and technological problems to be solved. Good engineering in any field is respected by good engineers in any other field.

The engineer who bashes other engineering fields is almost certainly a piss-poor engineer.

And this is particularly sad when some more and more of our population is being devoted to zero-sum games, rigging markets, and generally non-productive or counter-productive activities.

Oh.
I thought you were comparing juvenile delinquents versus engineers...

Rin says

Dan8267 says

I don't know what JD stands for

In America, it stands for Juris Doctor whereas in Britain and other nations, it's LLB, Bachelors of Law.

turtledove says

JDs will be the end of many professions. They are locusts and won't stop until every dime can be squeezed, in the form of professional fees, out of every other profession on the planet. They have such a powerful lobby that there is little fear of actionable legal malpractice. There's no such thing as a spurious suit if they can extract cash out of the other side. Even if the cash comes solely from the desire to just make them go away. You see it all the time in the medical profession. Someone has an absurd claim that would NEVER win in court. Insurance companies often elect to throw the other side some money just to make them go away (because they don't want to have to pay their own outrageous legal fees to fight it). JDs know this, so there's no such thing as a groundless suit. JDs are nothing short of parasites.

This is what I am experiencing, and why I thought the post relevant. 4x Lawyers in 4 decades, -2X Engineers. OOPS- lets destroy America? ARISE ALL AMERICANS - THE LAWYERS ARE THE ROOT CAUSE OF MUCH OF THE ECONOMIC ISSUES!

Blue Area=Malinvestment by Lawyers Advocacy, and Lawyers fees:

Dan8267 says

Good engineering in any field is respected by good engineers in any other field.

The engineer who bashes other engineering fields is almost certainly a piss-poor engineer.

Well, a lot of the intradepartmental bashing goes on, during college and certain graduate schools.

In other words, one batch of electrical engineering students get annoyed that their assignments in Signals & Systems takes 20-40 hours, so in order to vent, they take it out on Computer Science a/o Industrial engineering majors.

But then once school is over, everyone realizes that we're all in the same boat and screwed by management.

It's really very simple. Engineers take complicated ideas and try to make them simple. JDs, on the other hand, take simple ideas and make them complicated. Engineers produce things... JDs tear things apart. What a surprise that so many of our politicians harken from this area of study. Talk about lunatics running the asylum!

turtledove says

It's really very simple. Engineers take complicated ideas and try to make them simple. JDs, on the other hand, take simple ideas and make them complicated. Engineers produce things... JDs tear things apart. What a surprise that so many of our politicians harken from this area of study. Talk about lunatics running the asylum!

T-Dove ; Thanks for your insightfullness. May I recall an experience I had after I graduated.

2 Engineers spent a few years and developed a technology that is used more and more today so that its becoming an industry. There are not many engineers as a % of populace, but non-the-less there ideas were grasped and used. The costs of the development cost between $2-3 Million dollars over a decade.

100s of Business Majors and Lawyers intervened, so that the technology had to be gated through the business people ; and 80% of the time of the engineers then had to be explaining and proving to those not in the sciences how this worked.

In summary my experience is not unusual. Somehow, Tesla, Edison, Einstein, Wrights, Ford, Hughes and small teams innovated so greatly that many magnitidues more were benefited.

I have Lawyer friends and some are incredibly intelligent - their work is also complex and necessary. But the drag on advancements, and the social justice bent of new age lawyers is killing American Society. I tell you the truth Lawyers can be like a huge cancer to society, (and they did not do this intentionally)

The Lawyers have far more influence than knowledge on average.

US citizens have been fooled by this, and in that sense Lawyers are the great perceptionists, deceptionists, and Entitlmentists.

Yes they know that you must control the largest percentage of the masses, and this is a short term approach. And short term benefits to a minority lead to long term detriments to all others and societies in general.

As you might know, a Patent Agent a/o Patent Attorney is a legal specialization club, where a person with some science & engineering background actually has some career stability.

True - again in the short term.

Looking at this chart, and Lawyers intrusion into finance markets, NAFTA and other free trade, politics at all levels, education, Lobbying, what will the trend in the chart create for society?

Question 2: What if they number of Teslas, Fords, Einsteins, increased by that same amount?

Question 3: Why do not the Teslas, Fords, Bohrs, Newtons increase their power and influence by that same amount?

Entitlemented says

Question 3: Why do not the Teslas, Fords, Bohrs, Newtons increase their power and influence by that same amount?

Very simple, ppl do not subscribe to my "money brings happiness" theme

http://patrick.net/?p=1238061

And thus, expects that some big umbrella organization, like corporate America or academic America, will foot the bills and cover the expenses of doing R&D, without owing someone, something.

Sorry, but those with power don't share it.

Rin says

Well, a lot of the intradepartmental bashing goes on, during college and certain graduate schools.

Light spirited sparing is in jest. A good engineer or a good scientist respects all the wondrous aspects of nature and understands that nature does not give up its secrets easily, not in any field. There is great beauty in both black holes and bacteria. Curiosity demands study of both.

turtledove says

JDs, on the other hand, take simple ideas and make them complicated.

As do people in the financial industry. If a crime is complicated enough, the cops don't bother investigating it, prosecutors don't bother prosecuting, and juries and judges just shrug their shoulders.

So many lawyers donate so much money to democrats, its one of the main reasons I know that they are just as bad, if not worse, then republicans.

What we need is an affordable (law) care act, but not one written up by lawyers. An act that caps profits for law work at minimum wage

I dated a lawyer for several years. He was a smart, charming, guy. I remember feeling physically sick when he would laugh about the kinds of things they get away with:

1) I can usually tell what a case will ultimately settle for right from the start, but we like to get our fees first.

2) I bill for 30 minutes simply for touching a file. How else do you think we reach billable hours of 2600/year?

3) Insurance companies will pay me to go away.

These aren't exact quotes, because it was a very long time ago, but the message is the same. His smugness about taking advantage of people who trusted him made me truly sick.

Perhaps he doesn't represent every lawyer on the planet, but seeing him with his other lawyer buddies all laughing about how they screw everyone out of money showed me that there are a lot of them infecting the legal profession. And it was always about money and billable hours. Not one of them cared one bit about which side was right and which side was wrong. The legal profession has very little to do with justice.

Engineers, on the other hand, either do something right or the bridge falls down. Engineers don't get the big bucks for wasting people's time and resources. Furthermore, engineers could be sued. Lawyers are protected as a "learned profession" and are virtually impossible to sue no matter how deplorable their advice might have been.

Rin says

Entitlemented says

Question 3: Why do not the Teslas, Fords, Bohrs, Newtons increase their power and influence by that same amount?

Very simple, ppl do not subscribe to my "money brings happiness" theme

http://patrick.net/?p=1238061

And thus, expects that some big umbrella organization, like corporate America or academic America, will foot the bills and cover the expenses of doing R&D, without owing someone, something.

Sorry, but those with power don't share it.

Wow, So thats why all the kids dropped out of EE, Bohr and those guys were in it for the power. Lawyers are virtuous and dont seek power.

Dan8267 says

Computer Science is and engineering discipline. It's software engineering.

I see them as different. I would agree that software engineering is an engineering discipline...but computer science is more closely related to math.

Entitlemented says

Wow, So thats why all the kids dropped out of EE, Bohr and those guys were in it for the power. Lawyers are virtuous and dont seek power.

You don't get it, the typical scientist follows the credo 'Do What You Love and the Money Will Follow'.

Instead of that, the MBAs and the lawyers follow the money first and don't give a rat's about any 'love'.

In the end, w/o the money, scientists and engineers will have their ideas stolen by those with the financial means.

Rin says

'.

Instead of that, the MBAs and the lawyers follow the money first and don't give a rat's about any 'love'.

In other words, they become corporate or system whores and throw away their sorry lives in a vacuous pursuit of money they don't really need, doing something meaningless they don't like.

Dan8267 says

Rin says

Well, a lot of the intradepartmental bashing goes on, during college and certain graduate schools.

Light spirited sparing is in jest. A good engineer or a good scientist respects all the wondrous aspects of nature and understands that nature does not give up its secrets easily, not in any field. There is great beauty in both black holes and bacteria. Curiosity demands study of both.

Not sure how "social engineering," "financial engineering," and "software engineering" are related to nature.

BTW, do I look down upon the 3 fields? Not necessarily. As I noted above, to be really good at them, raw talent really counts. OTOH, the 3 fields are often filled with people who are 3rd rate players punching in their time after failing their 1st careers in some other discipline and people with very limited knowledge base yet full of hubris.

Rin says

And thus, expects that some big umbrella organization, like corporate America or academic America, will foot the bills and cover the expenses of doing R&D, without owing someone, something.

Or a benevolent founder of a hedge fund?

A rather timely discussion: Misconceptions About Licensing Software Engineers. It does raise an interesting question: should all "engineers" be able to pass the FE exam, a test of basic concepts that include business, chemistry, computer programming, ethics, economics, mathematics, mechanics, and probability and statistics?

EBGuy says

A rather timely discussion: Misconceptions About Licensing Software Engineers. It does raise an interesting question: should all "engineers" be able to pass the FE exam, a test of basic concepts that include business, chemistry, computer programming, ethics, economics, mathematics, mechanics, and probability and statistics?

Well, there are two things which will make software (plus other) engineering disciplines, valuable in the US.

First is some exam, like the FE (or PE in the case of facilities) and then next, make R&D [involving intellectual property], a national security issue.

And thus, if a bunch of executives decide to send R&D abroad, as oppose to generic manufacturing like tires or t-shirts, that they're in violation of a national security initiative and could face federal prosecution.

The above will, in effect, make most scientists & engineers valuable, from ages 21 to 70, as oppose to our current paradigm of ages 27 to 40, and then, fire 'em and offshore the other jobs to eastern Europe and Asia.