4 ms·

That’s only because doctors collude to limit the number of available residency places. I programmers were smart, they would: 1. Lobby the government to prohib

That’s only because doctors collude to limit the number of available residency places. I programmers were smart, they would: 1. Lobby the government to prohibit anyone from practicing programming without a license. 2. Limit the number of licenses granted each year

BurningFrog 2y ago
Fortunately, we don't have the social skills to make that happen.
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  Also, the vast majority of software bugs are annoying at worst, with no death potential. Powers that be would react a lot more aggressively if stack overflows routinely led to bodies on the pavement.
  - jcranmer 2y ago
    Considering the number of ransomware attacks and other viruses that infect hospitals, it wouldn't surprise me if stack overflows had quite a large body count.
  - bumby 2y ago
    The irony is that part is not commensurate to the risk of the software being developed.
cheese_van 2y ago
<That’s only because doctors collude to limit the number of available residency places.> Available residency slots are dictated by the funding made available through the Medicare program and ultimately Congress.
- adharmad 2y ago
  Out of curiosity, why cannot hospitals fund residency slots on their own with some riders (the resident should work in the same hospital for x years)? It seems odd that the medical profession is not willing to invest in the training of the next generation of professionals without government help.
  - vineyardmike 2y ago
    They do sometimes. People don’t realize how much of medicine, generally, is funded through the government. Additionally, society gives medicine a lot of leeway to act selfishly because the core practice of healing is so altruistic. Broadly, it’s the same issue that all jobs have: it’s cheaper to hire pre-trained professionals than to hire and train.
  - Spooky23 2y ago
    Because they need to support their executives and capital projects / debt service. That’s the discretionary budget… training doctors doesn’t improve the bottom line. Hospitals are really quasi-government entities. Their pricing structures have price controls based on Medicare reimbursements. A third of hospital revenue is Medicare and Medicaid. Both programs have been slowing rate growth, which in turn impacts private insurance as well. The institutions haven’t been successful in reducing cost growth. ACA built out regional cartels^H provider networks, essentially eliminating competition.
- bluefirebrand 2y ago
  > ultimately Congress Who is successfully lobbied by organizations of doctors Congress doesn't make decisions in a vacuum
- yCombLinks 2y ago
  Which was ultimately lobbied at such a low a number by the AMA, the primary organization representing doctors interests in congress. https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastating-doctor-shortage https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastati...
DiscourseFan 2y ago
Not a bad idea, actually, especially with all these new tools
- bumby 2y ago
  Good idea from a job severity/ protectionist standpoint or from a “protect the craft and quality for the good of the public” sort of way?
  - lmz 2y ago
    Why not both? Even better if you have to obtain accreditation as a professional in every different market because EU software is different from US software is different from Indian software...
    - bumby 2y ago
      There are a lot of economists who make arguments against protectionist policies. A common refrain is that it leads to higher consumer prices.
pants2 2y ago
Unfortunately since most of our jobs can be done remotely, that would likely drive a ton of software jobs overseas.
- labcomputer 2y ago
  I was trying to keep my comment short. Such a regulatory regime would be expected to close such obvious loopholes. In much the same way that a doctor in $FOREIGN_COUNTRY cannot practice telemedicine in the USA, I would expect the regulations to make a distinction between software (and services provided by software) developed by foreign and licensed programmers.
  - bookofjoe 2y ago
    >much the same way that a doctor in $FOREIGN_COUNTRY cannot practice telemedicine in the USA... U.S. retired doctor here. This is a fascinating possibility that never occurred to me until I read your comment. Could a foreign doctor not set up a system whereby she/he could appear to be in the U.S. while being in a country that's essentially unreachable by U.S. authorities? And take payment in cryptocurrency?
toast0 2y ago
> Lobby the government to prohibit anyone from practicing programming without a license. No way you're getting consensus on this one, but even if you could, it's too hard to stop. If you charge for compilers, and only provide them to licensed developers, hippies will make and distribute compilers for free.
- theendisney4 2y ago
  The hippies wouldnt be licenced but if they could they cant provide a certified corporate party to be liable for damages. Consensus isnt needed, just enough beurocracy to make development expensive.

BurningFrog 2y ago

Fortunately, we don't have the social skills to make that happen.

inglor_cz 2y ago
Also, the vast majority of software bugs are annoying at worst, with no death potential. Powers that be would react a lot more aggressively if stack overflows routinely led to bodies on the pavement.
- jcranmer 2y ago
  Considering the number of ransomware attacks and other viruses that infect hospitals, it wouldn't surprise me if stack overflows had quite a large body count.
- bumby 2y ago
  The irony is that part is not commensurate to the risk of the software being developed.

cheese_van 2y ago

<That’s only because doctors collude to limit the number of available residency places.> Available residency slots are dictated by the funding made available through the Medicare program and ultimately Congress.

adharmad 2y ago
Out of curiosity, why cannot hospitals fund residency slots on their own with some riders (the resident should work in the same hospital for x years)? It seems odd that the medical profession is not willing to invest in the training of the next generation of professionals without government help.
- vineyardmike 2y ago
  They do sometimes. People don’t realize how much of medicine, generally, is funded through the government. Additionally, society gives medicine a lot of leeway to act selfishly because the core practice of healing is so altruistic. Broadly, it’s the same issue that all jobs have: it’s cheaper to hire pre-trained professionals than to hire and train.
- Spooky23 2y ago
  Because they need to support their executives and capital projects / debt service. That’s the discretionary budget… training doctors doesn’t improve the bottom line. Hospitals are really quasi-government entities. Their pricing structures have price controls based on Medicare reimbursements. A third of hospital revenue is Medicare and Medicaid. Both programs have been slowing rate growth, which in turn impacts private insurance as well. The institutions haven’t been successful in reducing cost growth. ACA built out regional cartels^H provider networks, essentially eliminating competition.
bluefirebrand 2y ago
> ultimately Congress Who is successfully lobbied by organizations of doctors Congress doesn't make decisions in a vacuum
yCombLinks 2y ago
Which was ultimately lobbied at such a low a number by the AMA, the primary organization representing doctors interests in congress. https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastating-doctor-shortage https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastati...

DiscourseFan 2y ago

Not a bad idea, actually, especially with all these new tools

bumby 2y ago
Good idea from a job severity/ protectionist standpoint or from a “protect the craft and quality for the good of the public” sort of way?
- lmz 2y ago
  Why not both? Even better if you have to obtain accreditation as a professional in every different market because EU software is different from US software is different from Indian software...
  - bumby 2y ago
    There are a lot of economists who make arguments against protectionist policies. A common refrain is that it leads to higher consumer prices.

pants2 2y ago

Unfortunately since most of our jobs can be done remotely, that would likely drive a ton of software jobs overseas.

labcomputer 2y ago
I was trying to keep my comment short. Such a regulatory regime would be expected to close such obvious loopholes. In much the same way that a doctor in $FOREIGN_COUNTRY cannot practice telemedicine in the USA, I would expect the regulations to make a distinction between software (and services provided by software) developed by foreign and licensed programmers.
- bookofjoe 2y ago
  >much the same way that a doctor in $FOREIGN_COUNTRY cannot practice telemedicine in the USA... U.S. retired doctor here. This is a fascinating possibility that never occurred to me until I read your comment. Could a foreign doctor not set up a system whereby she/he could appear to be in the U.S. while being in a country that's essentially unreachable by U.S. authorities? And take payment in cryptocurrency?

toast0 2y ago

> Lobby the government to prohibit anyone from practicing programming without a license. No way you're getting consensus on this one, but even if you could, it's too hard to stop. If you charge for compilers, and only provide them to licensed developers, hippies will make and distribute compilers for free.

theendisney4 2y ago
The hippies wouldnt be licenced but if they could they cant provide a certified corporate party to be liable for damages. Consensus isnt needed, just enough beurocracy to make development expensive.