Almost every other major profession has rules like these. You can't even prepare taxes without complying with a code of ethics. This isn't the crazy logistical challenge you're making it out to be.
- Taking the hippocratic oath
- Passing the bar
- Obtaining a pilot's license
- Completing series 7,(63,66) exams
Yes, these are things people do. But these things are each different from each other, and different from a petition.
Some of them are not centralized lists, and others are not calls to political action.
Meanwhile others are discriminatory, in that they distinguish those who have proven proficiencies, as capable practicioners of valuable skills.
Simply affirming a willingness to act in a certain way only means so much. Refusing to act means less. Indicating an intent to prevent others from acting is yet another behavior.
Advertising any political intentions, regardless of actual skills or rationale, may carry sentimental value, and that's nice, I guess.
Meanwhile the possession of technical skills, which rest on the firmament of electrified silicon substrates, with open-ended usage patterns, which may eventually lead to these objects ...behaving with some semblance of ...sentient free will? Deciding thier own ethics? In ways not obvious to the inventor?
Are their parenting licenses?
Just kidding. That last part's a can of worms all its own.
Pledges don't require signatures. I've taken the pledge of allegiance to the United States of America...
Specifically, though I was pointing out flaws with respect to the part about "having teeth":
with actual teeth (violating it means you
can't commercially build software any more).
Taking a "pledge" sure ...but then also recording names, and then beyond even THAT enforcing violations, violations which carry penalties. But not just any single penalty for some transgression, a PERPETUAL penalty that blacklists a person.
There's an escalation in the magnitude of authority hidden in this idea, which starts with an ideal, and can quickly spin into ideology. And maybe delves into impossibilities, at best. At worst suspends disbelief, and convinces people things are fixed when nothing has actually changed.
Crimes are crimes. Incidents involving civil damages are recognized by state authorities. Meanwhile the by-laws of a subculture, fraternal guild or trade association are something else entirely. Without passing the bar exam maybe this becomes cult-like.
Okay, industry self governance is a thing too. Agreeing to ground rules, when regulatory iversight is dubious. Is the intent to provide protections against situations which legal state appointed authorities cannot legislate or perhaps fail to grasp? That sounds like a tall order which carries realities beyond a simple pledge or civic association's intentions.
If the intent is to somehow apply dogma to adversaries whom already flout rules and willfully undermine codes of conduct, those people will assuredly happily lie, sign the pledge, infiltrate and destroy whatever beautiful thing that had yet to hatch anyway. With falsified identities, no less. So, then what?
Making promises is nice. Communication of expectations is good. Codified guidelines are even better. Maybe the idea is for something like standards and practices departments within television networks, or the PMRC which tried to take stand against foul language in music, according to opinions regarding morality.
Software, isn't simple artistic expression, but still there would need to be enforcement, and a registry of good children who get presents from Santa, and bad children who get coal.
Who has the teeth? Who gets to bite? (hint: the words "everyone/anyone" does not belong in the response, because the buck stops somewhere real)
You sure seem to have a lot of irrelevant arguments designed to discourage people from engaging in concerted ethical action by committing to a code of conduct. It's not like anyone is forcing you to sign up to such a thing, so why are you so eager to pick holes in it?
Because it kind of smells like bullshit seizing moral high ground, and not actually changing anything.
Religion promises everything and delivers nothing.
My arguments are not irrelevant. You seem to be hinting that I'm a forum sliding paid mercenary shill on a mission to gaslight political opponents blah blah blah...
I am not some political interloper out to dilute conversation or discourage the action of others. I only outline my own rationale for why I think this is a pointless feel-good activity. Take this comment as my pledge. I am not being sarcastic.
Yes, I absolutely want a database of ethical software engineers and wholeheartedly support discriminating against people who aren't in it.