I’ve never been on a project that requires a software product stamped by a licensed engineer. NCEES dropped the software license because there was so little demand, compared to, say, civil engineers who consider a license a rite of passage to career growth.
1) you work for the federal government
2) you work under a licensed engineer
3) you work under an industrial exemption
There’s differences depending on state. There has been a more concerted effort to remove #3 recently due to both political reasons and the technical issues in this thread. Most people performing engineering work under an industrial exemption don’t actually realize it. Again, this is different state to state. For example, in some states you can’t start a business with “engineering” in the name unless you have a certain percentage of owners/principals with an engineering license.[1]
What actually happens is conflating terms in common parlance. “Engineer” and “engineer” are not necessarily the same. For example, a computer engineer may work under an industrial exemption (due to working in a manufacturing service) while a software engineer does not. Legally, an “Engineer” claims an explicit responsibility to public safety.[2] Apropos to the headline article, there is a distinction with this difference.
[1] https://fxbinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/state-by-state...
[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/11/progr...
For the same reason, it's harder to hire some rando budget doctor because the field is gate-keeped by the requirement of a licence, and liability.
You can't magically make Engineering the same without the same conditions. Add barriers top entry that see my pay rise, or have cheap programmers with no liability.