Let's blame the dev who pressed "Deploy"
Let's blame the dev who pressed "Deploy"
Following the CrowdStrike outage, I've stumbled upon an articles that claims that developers should have consequences. Do they?
You're viewing part of a thread.
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?
Do we allow for self taught doctors or accountants?
Is this limitation good? Furthermore, software development is something very easy to learn with 0 consequences.
Also, these regulations aren't being developed for all servers, just ones that can cause major economic damage if they stop functioning.
Many of those have excellent self-taught devs developing software for them- I know some of them.
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?
-
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.
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.
-
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.
-