As a practicing EE / RF comms engineer, I will say that it is very obvious when you're working with someone who thinks that their EE coursework wasn't useful for the real world.
As a practicing EE (power systems), I agree. It often becomes clear when someone is unable to distinguish a practical limit (this equipment is not rated for X, our operating procedures prohibit doing X) from a physical one (X is not possible because of underlying physical principles).
This. There are so many real world, practical, and pragmatic uses for EE. This example, which is basically knowing that the hardware specifications cannot meet the claims that are being made about a product, in an accurate or reliable fashion, is one I use on an everyday basis.
You don’t fall for marketing gimmicks.
Another thing is you know the relative price (ballpark figure) of the technology, as in how much it costs to make something, often just by eyeballing the actual product or by looking at its specifications. Sometimes this translates to more abstract and somewhat unrelated fields such as medications (if you read the patents and study them).
Looping through a list of items, and doing different operations based on their value is an extremely common occurrence, and you’d hard pressed to find a codebase that doesn’t use that pattern somewhere.
Welp, this is why interview fizzbuzz exists, because some people think of it as "software bullshit" instead of the simplest possible program you can imagine that should come out as fast as you can type it.
I feel attacked. I'm a DSP engineer and I haven't implemented an analog filter since I graduated. If we got into detail on RC filter gain and phase shift I'd fail. Do I have to give my EE degree back?