> yet you are here on a tech forum arguing for the necessity of professional certification ? I'm not sure if you're implying that there's some hypocrisy here;

> yet you are here on a tech forum arguing for the necessity of professional certification ? I'm not sure if you're implying that there's some hypocrisy here; I would be in favor of some kinds of certification process for software developers, for what it's worth, especially given the vast amounts of personal information that many developers have access to, even if they don't have any background in adequately keeping that data secure. > Do you think there are differences in your background that might explain why you hold the less common view here? My personal views have become less ideological and more data-driven as I've gotten older. I've shifted from approximately Republican, in the 90s, to more democratic, to more libertarian during the first Ron Paul cycle, to more ... honestly, I'm not sure what bucket it would be now. Mostly socially liberal, a little bit fiscally conservative, but most of all, data-driven. I'll accept whatever point of view that has the most evidence for promoting egalitarianism and humanism. Tech forums today appear to be broadly developing a strong libertarian politic. Or, maybe a vocal minority. dang is more circumspect on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15701584 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15701584 The most compelling stuff I've seen in recent years has suggested that regulation is a net positive on society, and that more regulated societies tend to be wealthier, healthier, and happier. This is not to say that all regulations are beneficial, of course. > I assume you'd agree that there can be an incentive for established players to want to lock in their positions by excluding competitors? Oh, sure. That's a thing that happens, and when it does, it should be fought against. It cannot, however, be used as a stick against all forms of regulation. > Since few consumers care enough about any particular issue to get legislation passed, the impetus for new laws often comes from industry. The causes behind various forms of regulation can be interesting. The EPA, for instance, exists in spite of the rather large amount of lobbying and marketing against it from businesses which it regulates. The FCC was up until recently in a similar position; the current administration has managed to effectively neuter it, for the time being. Lots of new laws come from industry lobbying. Lots of other laws come from legislators doing what they think is right, even if their morals don't agree with someone else's, or they're not particularly knowledgeable on the subject they're legislating. But, lots of other laws also come from science, or panels of experts providing consultation on a subject. > Are there some particularly strong pieces of evidence that you can offer, especially those that might compare the situation between otherwise comparable countries with higher or lower degrees of professional certification requirements? I didn't hit on this point in particular, but I did provide a small handful of links in another comment in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15731261 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15731261 My "regulation" tag in pinboard is still a bit light though, so I don't have an immediate reply for you and it's late and I don't want to start nerding on statistics right now. :-)