In Reply to: Re: "Are you an electrical engineer? If not, maybe I shouldn't be talking to you" posted by Soundmind on November 5, 2006 at 06:02:32:
"It's one thing to get a degree in engineering, that's an entry ticket. It's quite another to BE an enginineer."This is why trumpeting credentials (and demeaning others' credentials) serves no purpose other than self-aggrandizement. And "being" an engineer can take on numerous forms. From designing a superior product to helping those not up on the subject matter get some understanding of it.
"Tell me the name of the school you attended and graduated from and I'll petition them for a full refund of your tuition money. IMO, they didn't earn it."
Don't worry about the refund. I would have sought it myself if I thought it was a waste of time and money. I got my degree in 1985 at Case Western Reserve University.
Half the problem is because I am very familiar with a lot of what's discussed here, I find it galling whenever someone does post questionable information here, they first think nobody else is knowledgeable enough to notice anything questionable. And then use their credentials to overrule any challenges to the information. Some examples of this is the notion that applying "dither" is useful in D/A conversion (it isn't), higher oversample rates in D/A conversion improve S/N ratio (they don't necessarily do so), upsampling and oversampling improve resolution (they don't), and that the "sinc" function in digital filters is applied in the frequency domain (it's applied in the time domain). I'll try to kindly correct such information and explain why, but then Hell breaks loose. Be it accusing me of posting "misinformation", accusing me of not knowing the subject matter, or introducing irrelevant facts that convolute the issue.
If you do a search on AA, the worst thing I've done here was call some people "phonies." And levied the general accusation that some people post engineering facts but are unable to explain why. I've never used credentials as an overruling tool. I've never sought validation or consensus as an overruling tool (I call this "tag team"). I've never called anyone "charlatans" or "luddites". I've never demanded apologies. I've never questioned someone for purchasing products that may be of corrupt design and costs a lot of money. I've never accused anyone here of posting incorrect information. I just kindly correct it. I've never accused anyone of not knowing the subject matter. I've never accused anyone of lacking technical knowledge or background. And I've never told anyone he or she has no business engaging in technical discussion. I think it's totally unnecessarily to denigrate someone simply because he posts something that's questionable. Or denigrate someone who seems to lack familiarity with technical matters. I actually **enjoy** explaining things in plain speak, and do so to my best ability.
Hence I'll be willing to take arrows from the people here. For the information itself is what's important here, not the person who provides it.
And if I'm wrong, and am kindly corrected, no problem either. And I've been wrong and corrected **lots** of times. Nobody's perfect here.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: "Are you an electrical engineer? If not, maybe I shouldn't be talking to you" - Todd Krieger 10:44:05 11/05/06 (4)
- Re: "Are you an electrical engineer? If not, maybe I shouldn't be talking to you" - Soundmind 14:23:57 11/05/06 (3)
- Re: "Are you an electrical engineer? If not, maybe I shouldn't be talking to you" - Todd Krieger 00:46:15 11/06/06 (2)
- Re: "Are you an electrical engineer? If not, maybe I shouldn't be talking to you" - Soundmind 06:12:55 11/06/06 (1)
- Software design is ALL about problem solving - E-Stat 08:44:37 11/06/06 (0)