3 ms·
Other industries handle this kind of thing with a layer of indirection: instead of laws from the state, the state imbues a professional body with certification
by mikepurvis 5y ago
Other industries handle this kind of thing with a layer of indirection: instead of laws from the state, the state imbues a professional body with certification power, and the body sets standards by consensus or whatever other process among their members. So if you're an architect, or lawyer, or tradesperson, or whatever, you have to do things in the manner prescribed or you lose your license.
I know this kind of thing is a lightening rod for a lot of software folks, but it does have the nice property that it's proactive; you don't have to wait around for the obviously-unsafe practice to blow up in someone's face before you can do something about it.
And no one wants to have to get licensed to write some crud app in NodeJS. But maybe these kinds of high-stakes modules related to encryption, security, and so on could be a place to start with it; if you're going to work in these areas, and offer your work to the public (for money or otherwise), then you either need to be licensed by the professional body, or clearly advertise in the header of each file that the work has not be overseen by a licensed professional.
That's the kind of arrangement that could do things like specify languages, methods, interfaces, and so on.
- dylan604 5y agoAnytime gov't gets involved though, you have to consider how the lobbiest will get involved. So a proponent with deep pockets that is thouroghly entreched with a language about to be "banned" decides to hire a lobbiest to convince these "well educated in all things" gov't reps. Yet proponents of "safe" languages have no cash to spend. Which language is going to get banned then?
- platinumrad 5y agoGreen Hills with its decades of DoD contracts versus the left wing browser company. Gee I wonder who would win?
- NavinF 5y agoYep, and what happens when the committee (perhaps correctly) chooses a proprietary language as the safest language? Anyone making essential software would end up writing code like this: https://i.imgur.com/8S6JbDS.png https://i.imgur.com/8S6JbDS.png (labview; Haven't used it in 10 years, but I'm pretty sure it is 100% memory safe) Don't worry, the pricing will be FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory). You just won't be able to see the compiler and runtime sources or follow stack traces into stdlib code. For security reasons. Defense in depth, y'all.
- mikepurvis 5y agoBut the point of this is that it isn't the "government involved." As with other professional pursuits, the government says "we don't have the desire, expertise, or agility needed to make these decisions in-house, so we designate this organization to be our regulator of it." For example, here's the Professional Engineers Act in Ontario: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900941 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900941 None of it has anything to do with which tools or methods are used for the practice of engineering— it's all defining jurisdiction and constitutional meta-details about how the leadership is to be selected, term lengths, etc. So no one can achieve regulatory capture about what kind of concrete is to be used in bridges in Ontario by lobbying the Ontario government; you'd have to lobby the PEO. Maybe your argument is that they're effectively equivalent, but they're really not— the PEO is a pretty different kind of organization from just another government office.
- dylan604 5y ago>"we don't have the desire, expertise, or agility needed to make these decisions in-house, so we designate this organization to be our regulator of it." Yes, because this has stopped them doing dumb things before. The gov't will still be in charge of selecting the people in the regulator. The lobbiest will still have influence. There's just no way around it.
- mikepurvis 5y agoCan you please supply examples from law, medicine, trades, engineering, etc where you feel that lobbying of the government has led to the kind of outcomes you're envisioning?
- dylan604 5y agoTexas' ERCOT. It's a government appointed regulation body, not a branch of gov't. Are you really doubting that this is something that "might" happen? Edit: FAA allowing Boeing to self-certify 737MAX. FDA allowing/not allowing trials of drugs, or allowing a drug meant for one thing to be tried for something else totall untested (ex: AZT).