this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
267 points (95.6% liked)
Technology
60130 readers
3379 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Software engineering is too wide and deep for licensing to be feasible without a degree program- which would be a massive slap in the face to the millions of skilled self taught devs.
Some states let some people get professional licensure through experience alone. It just ends up taking more than a decade of experience to meet the equivalent requirements of a four year degree.
Yeaaa that's not exactly a solution
Why not? It is still valuing the self education of people. It just means having a license to manage the system requires people with significant experience.
And it isn't like a degree alone is required for licensure.
Because a decade of professional experience is a long time, and doesn't value independent experience. I've been coding for over 11 years, but professionally only a couple. Also software development is very international, how would that even be managed when working with self-taught people across continents?
I agree developers should be responsible, but licensing isn't it, when there are 16 year olds that are better devs than master's graduates.
Do we allow for self taught doctors or accountants?
Also, these regulations aren't being developed for all servers, just ones that can cause major economic damage if they stop functioning. And you don't need everyone to be qualified to run the service. How many water treatment pants are there where you only have a small set of managers running the plant, but most people aren't licensed to do so?
Is this limitation good? Furthermore, software development is something very easy to learn with 0 consequences.
Many of those have excellent self-taught devs developing software for them- I know some of them.
Maintenance is very different from software development.
Good software development requires at minimum expansive automated testing...
Do you trust anyone claiming to be self taught with the responsibility to design something that, if it fails, will cause billions in economic damage? Not the people you know, anyone who claims to be self taught?
I shouldn't be trusted if I hire without vetting and hand over control of a massive project to someone off the street without any QA controls, code review, or automated testing.
Then you do not get licensed and cannot work on certain projects that may require a licensed or accredited team.
Licensure isn't about how good you are. It's about ensuring that you, as a professional, understand the ramifications of your contributions to the work you do and the field you are a part of and accepting the responsibility of those ramifications. Continuing education is also a huge part of it but I don't think software engineers have much issue there.
Does it have a record across industries of demonstrably doing that? I don't believe so.
Is there any evidence of that actually being a problem amongst self-taught devs? (And not a problem amongst traditionally degree'd devs?)
In my experience, self-taught devs have a higher sense of responsibility when it comes to code than fresh grads or boot-camp devs. But of course once someone's been working for a bit it all evens out.