4 ms·
That is not a good analogy. But I will add that professional chemist licensing should be required and revocable
by upsidesinclude 4y ago
That is not a good analogy.
But I will add that professional chemist licensing should be required and revocable
- thereisnospork 4y agoChemists have nothing directly to do with toxicity and environmental effects either, they design and/or select chemicals to do a job. (The engineers make the aforementioned chemicals in bulk/cheaply/efficiently. Not that they never screw up, but the implied dereliction of ethical behavior you are insinuating doesn't exist and is frankly insulting. So yes, it is a valid analogy. Just as it would be equally valid [read: not valid at all] to damn the software engineering profession for the sins of AutoDesk, or whomever your villain du jour is.
- upsidesinclude 4y agoIf you do this work then you are intelligent enough to determine something about the chemicals you are mass producing. If nothing is known about them, should you be making them? There is your dilemma, I suppose. Claiming ignorance as a shield against accountability is a pretty weak stance. Just doing what you're told doesn't go over well either, if we can use history as a guide. My statement is intended to denounce those among you that have no concern with what their work will wrought in the world. If you can stand behind your actions then you aren't the target. Side note: most of software is written by hacks (read: google copypasters) that don't deserve the title engineer and do a disservice to actual programmers. No one cares about Autodesk other than Architects. The concern is Palantir, Facebook, Google, Cellebright, NSO Group