[allemagne]

Software that could kill is a small subset of overall software being written, but software that can arguably ruin or at least cause moderate havoc on people's lives (via PII) encompasses maybe a majority of jobs in the software industry [citation needed].

I don't know that having a "bar exam" is the best way to approach that problem, either. I think laws need to be written that cripple companies that don't follow best security practices and the rest will largely follow.

Maybe that eventually results in a sort of "bar exam" that companies endorse in order to cover their asses, but what are the chances that it will end up being a positive thing for programmers and not a bureaucratic nightmare test that everybody knows is bs?

[platinumrad]

A large amount (a majority maybe even?) of software written outside of Silicon Valley is "boring" business logic-y stuff that has a very limited ability to impact anyone's lives in a meaningful way.

I haven't thought too deeply about this but the solution to the PII exposure problem, in my opinion, is to heavily disincentivize entities from holding any data that they don't absolutely need to (probably via punishingly them heavily for slipping up).

[AstralStorm]

That is, unless you happen to be named Null. Which is a surprisingly common surname.