[doe_eyes]

> Obviously, not everyone who writes code needs a development license

That's actually a very likely outcome. The startling statistic is that roughly half of professions require occupational licensing. In some places, you need licensing to become a florist. In several states, being an interior designer or a gas pump attendant requires a permit. Software engineering is an absolute outlier as far as highly-paid jobs go.

I don't think this is right, but that's the world we're living in and we should stop fooling ourselves. There's a lot of SWEs who are talking about wanting some helpful, laser-focused regulation. Well, it's coming wholesale, and a fruit joke website is not going to be exempt.

[envp]

There’s already regulation affecting SDLC practices in the financial industry (SSDF in the US, DORA in the EU).

Definitely not a stretch for other (“important”) areas to start receiving such attention in the future.

[renewiltord]

So we can look at the software they produce and see if it's better. From what I can see they suck at it. There was that error where Citibank sent hundreds of millions to the wrong guys and that was totally due to software designed like a monkey did it.

Freaking nightmare with this licensing crap. But if you'll let me run a licensing company and make mine the compulsory one that everyone has to use I'm good for it.

I'll call it Certified Software Engineer LLC.

[mcmcmc]

The real value of licensing is enforcing liability, not that licensed professionals are necessarily better. With florists/stylists etc it’s more rent seeking than actually needed, but again… think of bridges.

[renewiltord]

Indeed. Here's an example of licensing: https://x.com/QuinnyPig/status/1806150889562054804