Referring to engineers with top secret+ security clearances as "consultants" seems reductionistic.

In what way? I'm genuinely curious; I would describe an engineer who is provided to build a customer product alongside a customer as either a "contractor" or a "consultant," depending mostly on their employer. A security clearance just changes what customers and products they work for.

▲

vscode-rest 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Contractor makes sense, consultant is a bit weird because the typical understanding is that a consultant comes in to share knowledge, not build product.

▲

tym0 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Then you're not familiar with software consultancy because that's exactly what they do.

	▲	vscode-rest 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ah ok then let’s just call them contractors because that’s what exactly what they do.

▲

throwawayq3423 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ok they are "consultants" with a federally guaranteed moat.