3 ms·

I think whatever valid points you might have are getting lost in your attempts at rhetoric. You may want to reconsider the relevance of the article you linked

I think whatever valid points you might have are getting lost in your attempts at rhetoric. You may want to reconsider the relevance of the article you linked yourself, given that it contains the phrase > The Hippocratic Oath has been eclipsed as a document of professional ethics by more extensive, regularly updated ethical codes issued by national medical associations and that, to my knowledge, it's not considered legally binding. In fact, you could consider it as similar to the ACM Code of Ethics, as both are not legally binding and yet they both do a pretty good job of mentioning a list of commonly made mistakes that people make that could get them in trouble (legally or morally or ethically) as well as processes for avoiding such mistakes.

austincheney 7y ago
> and that, to my knowledge, it's not considered legally binding. Violating the oath is grounds for immediate revocation of license which eliminates lawful practice forever whether or not professional. The actions that produced that violation may not be a lawful violation, but they typically are. What in software is of similar consequence?
- striking 7y ago
  From your previously linked article: > There is no direct punishment for breaking the Hippocratic Oath, although an arguable equivalent in modern times is medical malpractice and from "The Hippocratic Oath as Literary Text: A Dialogue Between Law and Medicine"[1] > Still today, the Oath continues to demand that physicians maintain ethics higher than those expected of society in general,[18] and it remains a code of professional identity that marks off "proper" medicine from various forms of alternative healing practices.'[19] Later, > This Part examines judicial opinions that allow doctors to perform [a lengthy list of acts and the cases in which they were allowed]. These opinions directly contradict specific portions of the Hippocratic Oath. (that section later goes on to discuss that the oath is inextricably tied to the analysis of medical ethics, and so it retains its share of social/moral/ethical relevance even if it is not always legally relevant... which in my opinion is not incomparable to how we should approach the ACM Code of Ethics.) I personally don't understand where you see a difference. 1: Lisa R. Hasday, The Hippocratic Oath as Literary Text: A Dialogue Between Law and Medicine, 2 Yale J. Health Pol'y L. & Ethics (2002). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol2/iss2/4 https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol2/iss2/4
  - austincheney 7y ago
    > I personally don't understand where you see a difference. It doesn't matter what difference I see or what my opinions are. It only matters in how you practice your profession. In practical terms this difference is distinguished with one word: licensing. If you wish to be taken seriously have credentials that certify credibility. This is a solved problem... just not in software. As an unlicensed unaccredited software developer you shouldn't take my opinions too seriously as I won't take yours.

austincheney 7y ago

> and that, to my knowledge, it's not considered legally binding. Violating the oath is grounds for immediate revocation of license which eliminates lawful practice forever whether or not professional. The actions that produced that violation may not be a lawful violation, but they typically are. What in software is of similar consequence?

striking 7y ago
From your previously linked article: > There is no direct punishment for breaking the Hippocratic Oath, although an arguable equivalent in modern times is medical malpractice and from "The Hippocratic Oath as Literary Text: A Dialogue Between Law and Medicine"[1] > Still today, the Oath continues to demand that physicians maintain ethics higher than those expected of society in general,[18] and it remains a code of professional identity that marks off "proper" medicine from various forms of alternative healing practices.'[19] Later, > This Part examines judicial opinions that allow doctors to perform [a lengthy list of acts and the cases in which they were allowed]. These opinions directly contradict specific portions of the Hippocratic Oath. (that section later goes on to discuss that the oath is inextricably tied to the analysis of medical ethics, and so it retains its share of social/moral/ethical relevance even if it is not always legally relevant... which in my opinion is not incomparable to how we should approach the ACM Code of Ethics.) I personally don't understand where you see a difference. 1: Lisa R. Hasday, The Hippocratic Oath as Literary Text: A Dialogue Between Law and Medicine, 2 Yale J. Health Pol'y L. & Ethics (2002). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol2/iss2/4 https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol2/iss2/4
- austincheney 7y ago
  > I personally don't understand where you see a difference. It doesn't matter what difference I see or what my opinions are. It only matters in how you practice your profession. In practical terms this difference is distinguished with one word: licensing. If you wish to be taken seriously have credentials that certify credibility. This is a solved problem... just not in software. As an unlicensed unaccredited software developer you shouldn't take my opinions too seriously as I won't take yours.