Bike Friday Tikit warning

On Sep 29, 9:26*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Sep 29, 5:43 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:

On 09-29-2012 08:46, DirtRoadie wrote:

Well, there you have it. There's no end to the problems that can pop
up when engineers have been involved.

Worse problems occur when engineers AREN'T involved.

I wouldn't hire an engineer to remove a tree, and I wouldn't hire a tree
remover to design a bicycle.

I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering
degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even
"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable
of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-
engineered solution.

Think of it this way- how could an engineer even consider
"engineering" a bike without some concept of what constitutes a "good"
bike.
And that understanding comes from feedback of those who know the
difference.
I think it's pretty clear that someone like Frank (since we are
speaking in generalities) reaches "this is good enough" (for something
engineered by someone else) and can neither envision nor grasp what
might be "better." At that point it becomes his "faith" which he
defends kicking and screaming about his "data" or raising straw
arguments that do little more than prove his lack of understanding.
Dylan's line "don't criticize what you can't understand" covers it.
Frank's "understanding (our prime example) ended last century. Now he
spends all his time using misquotes, partial or inapplicable facts and
smarminess in order to claim some great vision or knowledge. Sad.
DR

On 09-29-2012 23:26, Dan O wrote:
On Sep 29, 5:43 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 09-29-2012 08:46, DirtRoadie wrote:

Well, there you have it. There's no end to the problems that can pop
up when engineers have been involved.

Worse problems occur when engineers AREN'T involved.

I wouldn't hire an engineer to remove a tree, and I wouldn't hire a tree
remover to design a bicycle.

I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering
degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even
"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable
of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-
engineered solution.

There are engineers that are incompetent.
There are engineers that are lazy.
There are engineers that are dishonest
etc.

And obviously the best engineer can make a mistake.

Does that make an engineering team a worse choice
for safe design than anyone else?

--
Wes Groleau

“Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity.
But I'm not so sure about the universe.�
— Albert Einstein

On Saturday, September 29, 2012 9:43:51 PM UTC-7, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 09-29-2012 23:26, Dan O wrote:

On Sep 29, 5:43 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:

On 09-29-2012 08:46, DirtRoadie wrote:



Well, there you have it. There's no end to the problems that can pop

up when engineers have been involved.



Worse problems occur when engineers AREN'T involved.



I wouldn't hire an engineer to remove a tree, and I wouldn't hire a tree

remover to design a bicycle.



I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering

degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even

"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable

of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-

engineered solution.



There are engineers that are incompetent.

There are engineers that are lazy.

There are engineers that are dishonest

etc.



And obviously the best engineer can make a mistake.



Does that make an engineering team a worse choice

for safe design than anyone else?


There's that word "safe" again. Safe just means undertaken with due care to make the risk acceptable.

And no - the engineering team is no worse choice than anyone else... unless someone else *understands* the application better in some important way that the engineers do not, and this someone else has the ability to design an acceptable solution. Still and surely the professional engineers will be called in before any commercial entity sticks their neck out with product liability to the general public ("Hey, they were certified. Therefor, we exercised due care. So our customers don't have to think about it; just buy.") Meanwhile, "someone else" might not accept the compromises.

I totally respect and appreciate engineering. Look at it this way: Frank says it takes a lot to get some road users to engage their brain. I say even if they do, the outcome will vary. The worst may have a perfect driving record, and best may not have a driver's license.

On 9/29/2012 11:26 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Sep 29, 5:43 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 09-29-2012 08:46, DirtRoadie wrote:

Well, there you have it. There's no end to the problems that can pop
up when engineers have been involved.
Worse problems occur when engineers AREN'T involved.

I wouldn't hire an engineer to remove a tree, and I wouldn't hire a tree
remover to design a bicycle.

I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering
degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even
"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable
of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-
engineered solution.



As in everything, there are good and bad engineers. In Quebec, you have
to belong the Quebec engineering order. When you pass the courses and
get in, you get a ring. The ring is supposedly made from the material
of a bridge that collapsed due to faulty engineering. The idea is to
instill some humility into engineers. Doesn't always work but a good
idea. Once you start thinking that your credentials make you smarter
than everyone else, you stop looking critically at your work.

Duane Hébert wrote:
On 9/29/2012 11:26 PM, Dan O wrote:


I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering
degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even
"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable
of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-
engineered solution.

As in everything, there are good and bad engineers. In Quebec, you have
to belong the Quebec engineering order. When you pass the courses and
get in, you get a ring. The ring is supposedly made from the material of
a bridge that collapsed due to faulty engineering. The idea is to
instill some humility into engineers. Doesn't always work but a good
idea. Once you start thinking that your credentials make you smarter
than everyone else, you stop looking critically at your work.

There are good and bad engineers, good and bad doctors, good and bad
programmers, lawyers, bike mechanics, writers, plumbers, and probably
even dog walkers. I doubt there's a profession in which every
practitioner is highly skilled.

However, for every profession, there seems to be a cadre of folks who
think they are better than the professionals, despite having total lack
of education in the field. You can find them yelling at sporting events,
kvetching at parties, bragging at bars and slinging mud on the internet.

They have no idea what they _don't_ know. They've never taken the first
qualifying test, never competed for a position, never accumulated any
practical experience. But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sep 30, 9:22*am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Duane Hébert wrote:
On 9/29/2012 11:26 PM, Dan O wrote:

I know people who have gone to school and obtained engineering
degrees, are "trained" in the functions and procedures, and can even
"engineer" things (to a degree), but are simply inherently incapable
of thinking about things from the angles that will lead to a well-
engineered solution.

As in everything, there are good and bad engineers. In Quebec, you have
to belong the Quebec engineering order. When you pass the courses and
get in, you get a ring. The ring is supposedly made from the material of
a bridge that collapsed due to faulty engineering. The idea is to
instill some humility into engineers. Doesn't always work but a good
idea. Once you start thinking that your credentials make you smarter
than everyone else, you stop looking critically at your work.

There are good and bad engineers, good and bad doctors, good and bad
programmers, lawyers, bike mechanics, writers, plumbers, and probably
even dog walkers. *I doubt there's a profession in which every
practitioner is highly skilled.

However, for every profession, there seems to be a cadre of folks who
think they are better than the professionals, despite having total lack
of education in the field. You can find them yelling at sporting events,
kvetching at parties, bragging at bars and slinging mud on the internet.

They have no idea what they _don't_ know. *They've never taken the first
qualifying test, never competed for a position, never accumulated any
practical experience. *But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why Frank! Speaking of those who in their imagination are brilliant...
That's precisely how your name came up in discussion!
It's remarkable you do not understand the difference between a
hypothetical and a fact.
One of your problems is that you very obviously fall into the category
of not knowing what you don't know.
You repeatedly and unapologetically say silly things.

The problem is that many things you say are judged and shown to be
objectively erroneous (or incomplete) by their content, not by what
credentials you may claim to possess.

Love your straw people though. You can't even discuss anything, with
invoking them, can you?
What engineering course did those come from?
They prove nothing and are a very juvenile method of argument/
discussion.
You believe you are brilliant and never in error. The data shows
otherwise.
Thanks for further showing us that you OWN a bike without a downtube
that by your own previous adamant claims should be unrideable.
Your utter inflexibility and intolerance is really quite funny.
DR

On Sunday, September 30, 2012 8:22:32 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

snip


But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

On 09-30-2012 12:40, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Sep 30, 9:22 am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
They have no idea what they _don't_ know. They've never taken the first
qualifying test, never competed for a position, never accumulated any
practical experience. But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

Why Frank! Speaking of those who in their imagination are brilliant...
That's precisely how your name came up in discussion!
It's remarkable you do not understand the difference between a
hypothetical and a fact.
One of your problems is that you very obviously fall into the category
of not knowing what you don't know.
You repeatedly and unapologetically say silly things.

Uh, it wasn't Frank that started this sub-thread
with a very silly denigration of engineers.

--
Wes Groleau

Curmudgeon's Complaints on Courtesy:
http://www.onlinenetiquette.com/courtesy1.html

Wes Groleau wrote:
On 09-30-2012 12:40, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Sep 30, 9:22 am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
They have no idea what they _don't_ know. They've never taken the first
qualifying test, never competed for a position, never accumulated any
practical experience. But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

Why Frank! Speaking of those who in their imagination are brilliant...
That's precisely how your name came up in discussion!
It's remarkable you do not understand the difference between a
hypothetical and a fact.
One of your problems is that you very obviously fall into the category
of not knowing what you don't know.
You repeatedly and unapologetically say silly things.

Uh, it wasn't Frank that started this sub-thread
with a very silly denigration of engineers.


Oh, and DR... If you feel the need to engage in character assassination,
could you possibly do it without insulting my profession.

On Sep 30, 6:46*pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 09-30-2012 12:40, DirtRoadie wrote:

On Sep 30, 9:22 am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
They have no idea what they _don't_ know. *They've never taken the first
qualifying test, never competed for a position, never accumulated any
practical experience. *But in their imagination, they are brilliant.

Why Frank! Speaking of those who in their imagination are brilliant...
That's precisely how your name came up in discussion!
It's remarkable you do not understand the difference between a
hypothetical and a fact.
One of your problems is that you very obviously fall into the category
of not knowing what you don't know.
You repeatedly and unapologetically say silly things.

Uh, it wasn't Frank that started this sub-thread
with a very silly denigration of engineers.

--
Wes Groleau

* * Curmudgeon's Complaints on Courtesy:
* *http://www.onlinenetiquette.com/courtesy1.html

Thanks for taking the bait.
I agree that there are good engineers and bad engineers (or any other
occupation or avocation) .
However whether any individual is one or the other cannot be
determined solely from what he tells you.

DR