In Canada, you get sued if you call yourself an engineer when you're not part of an order of engineers.
Even if you're a bona fide engineer, but not enrolled in the order, calling yourself one opens the floodgates of hell where spaghetti coders do the same and get hired by retarded HR departments to take the lead on some mission-critical software.
I like this. I am a self-learned developer. When my peers call themselves engineers, I spit my coffee.
> In Canada, you get sued if you call yourself an engineer when you're not part of an order of engineers.
Ehhhh. If you try to stamp and sign structural engineering documents as an engineer, and then a bridge collapses, you're open to litigation. I don't think anyone has been (successfully?) sued for declaring themeselves as Software Engineers in Canada. There are no damages.
Interestingly, you can call yourself an "SE," and its fine (according the professional engineering associations), but companies in YVR actively recruit "software engineers" (e.g. Electronic Arts)
Many jurisdictions in the US have protected titles such as "professional engineer" or "licensed engineer." IEEE's position is that "engineer" is an available title for people who have graduated with a degree from an ABET or EAC accredited engineering program and the legally protected titles should remain protected.
As an experienced Canadian developer who is seeking a work visa to work in the US, it is actually extremely difficult to get one.
It seems as though the US prioritizes shit-developers/wannabe-engineers over experienced Canadian developers. Which kind of makes sense, in that you feed your own before feeding your neighbour.
So I really doubt that H1B flooding is a thing. Open to debate though.
"Many of the visas are given out through a lottery, and a small number of giant global outsourcing companies had flooded the system with applications, significantly increasing their chances of success. While he had one application in last year’s lottery and lost, one of the outsourcing companies applied for at least 14,000."
A quick fix would be to award H1B based on salary instead of lottery.
On paper, it's the same in the US. In practice, no one cares, and you see the title "Front end engineer" for "guy who tweaks the CSS until the site looks right" and "UX engineer" for "guy who makes pictures of what the product should look like in Photoshop".
I do cringe, though, at the extreme overuse of the term in software; I have two parents who are legit PEs in the US and drilled the distinction in with me.
At the very least, it should be reserved for someone with a broad theoretical and practical background who solves more complicated problems ... but you know how title inflation goes.
Deals often are on and then off or otherwise not necessarily expected to happen. In the midst of that, services typically and properly tend to push forward with what they were already doing as though no deal is going to happen. The worst thing you can do, is halt your progress during a negotiation.
Halting progress indeed seems like the commonsensical thing to do. A massive UI overhaul is not be the most resource-efficient course of action if you plan on announcing your demise. Hence my startling
What does it mean that a leg broke? Correct me if I'm wrong cause I'm no expert, but I'd assume that there'd be some 'emergency' backup legs to address this kind of event?
What does "not upright" mean? Did it crash? Or is it simply in limbo, leaning, at an x degree angle?
Every extra part is extra weight, needing extra fuel, which in turn needs extra-extra-fuel because of the weight of that new fuel, and so on. There is very little redundancy on a rocket.
It's unknown what exactly 'not upright' means just yet.
Now you have two problems. But I wonder if something much simpler, like a net, wouldn't make more sense. As soon as the rocket touches down, the net extents and wraps the rocket, keeping it upright.
Robot arms are a complex control problem all on their own. To catch the rocket they'd have to be very fast, and very precise. At the same time, the rocket's control loops already have only a very small margin for error. A small miss by either system and you have a much higher chance of failure.
In terms of a net, I imagine something that's lying on the deck under tension between four bendy rods. When the rocket is close enough, the rods snap over to the other side, furling the rocket in the net and holding it more or less steady.
I'm assuming that means it's in 10,000 pieces scattered across the Pacific. I'd be shocked if it didn't topple over, and once it goes over it's blowing up.
> 'emergency' backup legs to address this kind of event?
For the extra weight and complexity a second set of legs would add, I'd expect they'd shore up the primary legs instead, unless they were already at the threshold of being too heavy.
The reason is because they learned out of innate curiosity and true passion. You always go farther with those.
However, you go even farther with curiosity, passion and a degree.