4 ms·
That would seem to result in industry consolidation and declining innovation. Software isn't made of physical materials anyway, it's speech. How about instead
by maxwell 2y ago
That would seem to result in industry consolidation and declining innovation.
Software isn't made of physical materials anyway, it's speech. How about instead we impose open source requirements to enable public verification of critical systems?
- gorft 2y agoInnovation like calculating numbers incorrectly and getting people sent to jail? Or maybe just another hundred slow, rent-seeking React web apps that'll disappear when the series B money dries up, if we're lucky. We must have different ideas of what innovation is.
- gizmo686 2y agoSo, outsource the core government function of regulation to "the public". Who exactly do you imagine is going to actually do this public verification, and where is their paycheck going to come from. Some software is critical infrastructure and needs to be treated as such. We are not special. Every other engineering discipline has gone through this same process as and arrived at the inevitable conclusion that government regulation is essential, but only after causing unthinkable damage to the public first
- exe34 2y agosoftware "engineers" love the cachet but hate the idea that they might also have to uphold the values and responsibilities of engineering. I say we regulate the word engineer the same way it is in many countries for real engineering. if you don't want to progress beyond code monkey, you can be a software developer and innovate yet another react clone. if you want to be called an engineer, you learn and follow the regulations.
- maxwell 2y agoForcing transparency isn't outsourcing anything.
- M95D 2y agoEnabling public verification is not the same as required verification.