5 ms·

And people wonder why I've argued that, at some point, IT needs to be a certified and regulated profession like lawyers, doctors, engineers, nurses, pilots, acc

And people wonder why I've argued that, at some point, IT needs to be a certified and regulated profession like lawyers, doctors, engineers, nurses, pilots, accountants, electricians, plumbers, teachers, etc. If the future is going to be built using software and data, it's probably going to be essential that the general public have some agency -- public or private -- to safeguard the public interest. It takes years of dedication to be a professional electrician or plumber, but anybody off the street can build an application that aggregates personal information and isn't subject to any sort of regulation or oversight or system of professional ethics. That doesn't just safeguard the public. It also safeguards the employed individuals when they say, "No, that is not allowed under the ethics of my profession." This isn't about "let's make the government save us," it's about creating a legal framework to protect the interests of the public and give ethical considerations in data management and software design some legal backing.

52-6F-62 8y ago
I generally like the idea— it's probably a sign of maturity. I'd add that it would be nice to be able to operate outside of certain fields and certain types of operations without that level of certification. For instance, freelance web devs, small business software employees, etc who aren't dealing in things like personal or trivial data could continue operation. For example: you don't need to be a doctor to be certified in first aid, or even administer first aid—but you likely wouldn't attempt an invasive, life-threatening surgery. I'd also like to see—if that kind of regulation were to pass—the inclusion of some kind of grandfather clause that would include the ability to test without formal education. The reason being there are very many highly capable developers/engineers in the field who don't possess the exact formal background—and in many cases came from other formal backgrounds. I'd definitely hear arguments for not requiring education at any time, but to keep it on par with the other professions you listed I'll leave it as is. This might not be the thread for a larger discussion on this—because it seems like it would be a larger discussion. An interesting one, though... Implementation seems like it would be a challenge, but then again I don't know the stories behind who more modern professions like electricians were regulated. I imagine that field grew much more slowly.
- sizzle 8y ago
  I agree, what do you think about some enforceable "do good" prior consent laws, in the same vein as scientists trying to do research on humans and requiring prior consent, where if you are caught being unethical towards the people on the other end of your work product, then there will be sanctions and steep penalties equal to how severe the work is judged against harming human rights etc. How do you modify the above idea if you think it has merit? "I'd also like to see—if that kind of regulation were to pass—the inclusion of some kind of grandfather clause that would include the ability to test without formal education." Why not have some sort of certification process you can do while working that holds the individual accounts to the values of being unethical and will have consequences for not adhering to, at all levels like on the scale of GDPR violations. Also there should be steeper penalities against companies acting in bad faith, similar to GDPR for human rights. Thoughts?
  - 52-6F-62 8y ago
    > Why not have some sort of certification process you can do while working that holds the individual accounts to the values of being unethical and will have consequences for not adhering to, at all levels like on the scale of GDPR violations. Oh with regard to this one, I don't think my wording was clear. I meant with regard to testing or challenging to be certified without having a formal CS/related background. As: a doctor would have to have an MD to practice as a doctor amongst other certifications— I was contending that an explicit CS degree may not be an optimal equal designation for practicing software engineering/research, as it were. As a background— there are many talented and influential researchers who would be cut out of practicing if the line were drawn at a reputed CS degree. Aligning "software practice" (for lack of better wording) hard with a CS degree might be poor bounds for the field. But I definitely think I agree, at least on a high level with what you're proposing. I hadn't considered it. Good things have come out of research using the large amounts of data available, so it should continue. But there definitely should be some sort of bounds and method for accountability. Also would include a special permissions and appeal process. There's I'm sure a lot of cost/benefit judgement as there is in many scientific experiments (there's seemingly a great deal of that in biological testing). And you also might restrict certain entities from performing the research and instead be compensated for their collected data by a reputable research group. Said group can produce the hard/applied research, patents, and license them to groups to use them.
blihp 8y ago
That won't help even a little bit in this case. That's like trying place the responsibility to reduce the amount of garbage generated on those who drive the garbage trucks. The decision to engage in the bad behavior usually doesn't come from IT staff or engineers, it comes from management. Hold the leaders of these organizations responsible and you'll see the problem fixed real quick.
- ken 8y ago
  Why not? The decision first comes from management, but engineers are the ones who implement it. I think things would change pretty quick if engineers responded to such requests with "I can't do that, because my professional association would remove me from their membership, which would revoke my license to write software in this country at all". That's how (AIUI) law, medicine, (real) engineering, etc., work today.
  - blihp 8y ago
    Unless you've got a legal/regulatory structure to enforce it, it can't work. And there is absolutely no will on the part of corporations or Congress to do such a thing as it runs contrary to their interests. Even if it were feasible, software development is one of the easiest things to jurisdiction shop since it can be done anywhere. So unless you further mandate where the development must be done, it still won't work. Keep in mind that most law/medicine/engineering work has some local component anchoring it to local laws. (i.e. currently, someone typically needs to be 'boots on the ground' in the jurisdiction to provide the service) Software doesn't have that. (edit: obviously, this is a U.S.-specific view of the situation. Other countries may not have the same issues)
    - Misdicorl 8y ago
      What about an organization which 1) Maintains a membership list 2) Maintains a list of software which is signed off on by members 3) Browser/OS/etc utilities which refuse and/or warn when trying to run software not in the registry 4) Member expulsion if registered software is found to be nefarious This is basically the system Apple/Microsoft/Debian/etc/etc already use for official software distribution. We just need the organization to move out of their walled gardens. The big leak here is users which have to use resources they don't control. I can imagine an IaaS company which won't run software unless its in the registry, and then companies can boast that your data is 'safe' (or at least not nefarious) because they run in this kind of environment.
sk5t 8y ago
Very true. A "morally flexible" lawyer still has disbarment and legal sanction to worry about, and this may provide a natural balancing force against illegal or immoral client requests. A morally-bankrupt programmer has almost none of those strictures or formal obligations.
module0000 8y ago
>> anybody off the street can build an application No they can't. The closest is they can steal(copy/paste) portions of other people's applications, change some text, and attempt to take credit for them. Also, we do have agency(private) that you suggested. Developer certification programs exist for nearly every language and platform. They aren't very popular. Red Hat will certify you as a java developer for JBoss, Oracle will certify you as a java developer as well. If you can't write code, but still want to feel geeky and have a career as a waiter, you can go get certified as an "ethical hacker" too. There is no shortage of agency - employers and consumers simply do not care, and by that, I mean they do not want to pay(higher prices) for it. PS: You can go be an amateur electrician or plumber today, without breaking any laws. However, if you'd like to touch private/public power or water/waste infrastructure, then you need endorsement. It's not illegal for you to hire me(a total amateur at those 2 trades) to both wire and plumb the new house you are building. The awkward moment will be when the water and power company refuse to connect your house, because the work I did was not the work of a licensed electrician or plumber. I understand the spirit of your analogy, but it doesn't translate as well with IT. For that analogy to work, then private/public internet infrastructure would have to refuse to inter-operate with your software if you didn't meet their licensing/certification standard.
tareqak 8y ago
What about having a designation that is independent of any one profession, but possibly applicable to any or all of them? It could (and probably should) be administered by a self-regulating body. Any government or NGO would be allowed to require work product be fulfilled by professionals holding this designation at their choosing. Something like "Privacy-first Professional".
CamperBob2 8y ago
And people wonder why I've argued that, at some point, IT needs to be a certified and regulated profession like lawyers, doctors, engineers, nurses, pilots, accountants, electricians, plumbers, teachers, etc. Awesome idea. The same governments who are sending RFPs to burtonator's company will then have the ability to decide who is even allowed to work in the industry.
- da_chicken 8y ago
  How exactly do you think bridges and buildings are built? Who do you think operates the state bar for lawyers? Who do you think operates public school teacher certification?
  - CamperBob2 8y ago
    Looking around the room, I don't see any bridges or chalkboards or courtroom paraphernalia. I see a personal computer. How exactly do you think the machine you're typing on was built?! Do you want to go back to the 1970s? Because this is how you get back to the 1970s, when only a rarefied priesthood had access to computing power. Don't expect to accomplish that without encountering strong opposition.
munk-a 8y ago
I don't think regulation is necessarily required, but I think consequences are... and serious ones at that. Data misuse and "oopies" data breaches by shady companies that were about to go out of business are actions that should be seen as malicious and come with serious penalties. Judges aren't the best at tech stuff but if they're lacking we (techy people) should help inform guidelines and let the justice system do its job here.

52-6F-62 8y ago

I generally like the idea— it's probably a sign of maturity. I'd add that it would be nice to be able to operate outside of certain fields and certain types of operations without that level of certification. For instance, freelance web devs, small business software employees, etc who aren't dealing in things like personal or trivial data could continue operation. For example: you don't need to be a doctor to be certified in first aid, or even administer first aid—but you likely wouldn't attempt an invasive, life-threatening surgery. I'd also like to see—if that kind of regulation were to pass—the inclusion of some kind of grandfather clause that would include the ability to test without formal education. The reason being there are very many highly capable developers/engineers in the field who don't possess the exact formal background—and in many cases came from other formal backgrounds. I'd definitely hear arguments for not requiring education at any time, but to keep it on par with the other professions you listed I'll leave it as is. This might not be the thread for a larger discussion on this—because it seems like it would be a larger discussion. An interesting one, though... Implementation seems like it would be a challenge, but then again I don't know the stories behind who more modern professions like electricians were regulated. I imagine that field grew much more slowly.

sizzle 8y ago
I agree, what do you think about some enforceable "do good" prior consent laws, in the same vein as scientists trying to do research on humans and requiring prior consent, where if you are caught being unethical towards the people on the other end of your work product, then there will be sanctions and steep penalties equal to how severe the work is judged against harming human rights etc. How do you modify the above idea if you think it has merit? "I'd also like to see—if that kind of regulation were to pass—the inclusion of some kind of grandfather clause that would include the ability to test without formal education." Why not have some sort of certification process you can do while working that holds the individual accounts to the values of being unethical and will have consequences for not adhering to, at all levels like on the scale of GDPR violations. Also there should be steeper penalities against companies acting in bad faith, similar to GDPR for human rights. Thoughts?
- 52-6F-62 8y ago
  > Why not have some sort of certification process you can do while working that holds the individual accounts to the values of being unethical and will have consequences for not adhering to, at all levels like on the scale of GDPR violations. Oh with regard to this one, I don't think my wording was clear. I meant with regard to testing or challenging to be certified without having a formal CS/related background. As: a doctor would have to have an MD to practice as a doctor amongst other certifications— I was contending that an explicit CS degree may not be an optimal equal designation for practicing software engineering/research, as it were. As a background— there are many talented and influential researchers who would be cut out of practicing if the line were drawn at a reputed CS degree. Aligning "software practice" (for lack of better wording) hard with a CS degree might be poor bounds for the field. But I definitely think I agree, at least on a high level with what you're proposing. I hadn't considered it. Good things have come out of research using the large amounts of data available, so it should continue. But there definitely should be some sort of bounds and method for accountability. Also would include a special permissions and appeal process. There's I'm sure a lot of cost/benefit judgement as there is in many scientific experiments (there's seemingly a great deal of that in biological testing). And you also might restrict certain entities from performing the research and instead be compensated for their collected data by a reputable research group. Said group can produce the hard/applied research, patents, and license them to groups to use them.

blihp 8y ago

That won't help even a little bit in this case. That's like trying place the responsibility to reduce the amount of garbage generated on those who drive the garbage trucks. The decision to engage in the bad behavior usually doesn't come from IT staff or engineers, it comes from management. Hold the leaders of these organizations responsible and you'll see the problem fixed real quick.

ken 8y ago
Why not? The decision first comes from management, but engineers are the ones who implement it. I think things would change pretty quick if engineers responded to such requests with "I can't do that, because my professional association would remove me from their membership, which would revoke my license to write software in this country at all". That's how (AIUI) law, medicine, (real) engineering, etc., work today.
- blihp 8y ago
  Unless you've got a legal/regulatory structure to enforce it, it can't work. And there is absolutely no will on the part of corporations or Congress to do such a thing as it runs contrary to their interests. Even if it were feasible, software development is one of the easiest things to jurisdiction shop since it can be done anywhere. So unless you further mandate where the development must be done, it still won't work. Keep in mind that most law/medicine/engineering work has some local component anchoring it to local laws. (i.e. currently, someone typically needs to be 'boots on the ground' in the jurisdiction to provide the service) Software doesn't have that. (edit: obviously, this is a U.S.-specific view of the situation. Other countries may not have the same issues)
  - Misdicorl 8y ago
    What about an organization which 1) Maintains a membership list 2) Maintains a list of software which is signed off on by members 3) Browser/OS/etc utilities which refuse and/or warn when trying to run software not in the registry 4) Member expulsion if registered software is found to be nefarious This is basically the system Apple/Microsoft/Debian/etc/etc already use for official software distribution. We just need the organization to move out of their walled gardens. The big leak here is users which have to use resources they don't control. I can imagine an IaaS company which won't run software unless its in the registry, and then companies can boast that your data is 'safe' (or at least not nefarious) because they run in this kind of environment.

sk5t 8y ago

Very true. A "morally flexible" lawyer still has disbarment and legal sanction to worry about, and this may provide a natural balancing force against illegal or immoral client requests. A morally-bankrupt programmer has almost none of those strictures or formal obligations.

module0000 8y ago

>> anybody off the street can build an application No they can't. The closest is they can steal(copy/paste) portions of other people's applications, change some text, and attempt to take credit for them. Also, we do have agency(private) that you suggested. Developer certification programs exist for nearly every language and platform. They aren't very popular. Red Hat will certify you as a java developer for JBoss, Oracle will certify you as a java developer as well. If you can't write code, but still want to feel geeky and have a career as a waiter, you can go get certified as an "ethical hacker" too. There is no shortage of agency - employers and consumers simply do not care, and by that, I mean they do not want to pay(higher prices) for it. PS: You can go be an amateur electrician or plumber today, without breaking any laws. However, if you'd like to touch private/public power or water/waste infrastructure, then you need endorsement. It's not illegal for you to hire me(a total amateur at those 2 trades) to both wire and plumb the new house you are building. The awkward moment will be when the water and power company refuse to connect your house, because the work I did was not the work of a licensed electrician or plumber. I understand the spirit of your analogy, but it doesn't translate as well with IT. For that analogy to work, then private/public internet infrastructure would have to refuse to inter-operate with your software if you didn't meet their licensing/certification standard.

tareqak 8y ago

What about having a designation that is independent of any one profession, but possibly applicable to any or all of them? It could (and probably should) be administered by a self-regulating body. Any government or NGO would be allowed to require work product be fulfilled by professionals holding this designation at their choosing. Something like "Privacy-first Professional".

CamperBob2 8y ago

And people wonder why I've argued that, at some point, IT needs to be a certified and regulated profession like lawyers, doctors, engineers, nurses, pilots, accountants, electricians, plumbers, teachers, etc. Awesome idea. The same governments who are sending RFPs to burtonator's company will then have the ability to decide who is even allowed to work in the industry.

da_chicken 8y ago
How exactly do you think bridges and buildings are built? Who do you think operates the state bar for lawyers? Who do you think operates public school teacher certification?
- CamperBob2 8y ago
  Looking around the room, I don't see any bridges or chalkboards or courtroom paraphernalia. I see a personal computer. How exactly do you think the machine you're typing on was built?! Do you want to go back to the 1970s? Because this is how you get back to the 1970s, when only a rarefied priesthood had access to computing power. Don't expect to accomplish that without encountering strong opposition.

munk-a 8y ago

I don't think regulation is necessarily required, but I think consequences are... and serious ones at that. Data misuse and "oopies" data breaches by shady companies that were about to go out of business are actions that should be seen as malicious and come with serious penalties. Judges aren't the best at tech stuff but if they're lacking we (techy people) should help inform guidelines and let the justice system do its job here.