[H-GEN] Selections from RISKS DIGEST 19.57

[Frank Brand]

> The second article is particularly relevant to all those who are
> developers on this list. I believe that within a decade there will be
> tighter controls over the qualifications of professional
> programmers/Software Engineers, through membership of ACS/IEAust and
> government regulation.
> 
> Raymond Smith


Reply on issue 1. - Not aware of any off the top of my head.

Comment on issue 2.

I can see the logic in one way but increasing regulation is flying in
the face of what most governments are hoping to achieve. Governments are
pretty lousy regulators of most areas of activity and that goes twice
for highly technical areas. The trend is away from Government regulation
to self-regulation.

Governments add layers of bureuacracy (ie translate as cost and
generalinefficiency) and add little in value. Government regulation is,
in general retrospective in action. The police catch a criminal after
the crime - didn't stop it happening, the damage is done, the fact that
the guilty are caught is not great consolation to the injured. ASC
regulations did not stop Skase and Bond.

Some people love regulation as it is an barrier to entry (eg. Kerry
Packer and television). Imagine how Bill Gates would enjoy holding up
opposition developments long enough to get his products to market by
entangling companies in court cases about whether the programmers were
qualified.

Come to think of it, would Linux ver. 0.01 have qualified - wasn't he
programmer an unqualified nobody from Scandinavia.

There are lots of other arguments but I've probably bored you enough for
now.

-- 
Frank Brand
E-mail: fbrand at uq.net.au
Homepage: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzfbrand
----------------------- HUMBUG General List --------------------------------
echo "unsubscribe general" | mail majordomo at humbug.org.au # To Unsubscribe