10 ms·
I know PE licensing doesn't in general make a lot of sense of software. I read all the discussions on HN on this topic with a lot of interest. I agree it's not
by auxym 5y ago
I know PE licensing doesn't in general make a lot of sense of software. I read all the discussions on HN on this topic with a lot of interest. I agree it's not even a perfect system for traditional engineering.
But consider this: say you were a licensed engineer, and writing shoddy code you would face the risk of losing said license and not being able to practice in the future. Yes, even if "your boss told you to do it". You are the engineer, you are the professional, it's your ass on the line if lives are lost or damaged. Then your choice is either pushing back and risk to get fired, or don't push back but risk to lose your license.
- MrQuimico 5y agoI'm sure this change from country to country, but at least in my country you don't need to be "licensed" to be held liable because of the damage you do and you can be disqualified to do that job. My point being that better software is not going to be written just because the people writing it is afraid of losing their license or being held liable, because in many circumstances that can already happen. The problem here are not only the developers and the crappy code. Some people here put this thing in production knowing that it was faulty, or once they knew it didn't work as expected they did all they could to hide this for years, blaming others of their own mistakes. And yes, I agree we need to be better. But it's very important to understand that many of the potential licensed software engineers that are already writing crappy software today and will continue to do so if licensed because they just don't know better.