🚀 go-pugleaf

I've been following this thread a bit, but must admit I've lost the original
intent of the proposed NJ law.

Is it to protect John Q Public from buying/commissioning a program from
a scam artist?

Is it to protect the public at large from terrible accidents like the
X-ray machine?

Is it to increase the NJ treasury?

Is it just to get votes at re-election?

Admittedly, these last two are somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the first two
are valid concerns.

John Q Public may not have the resources to investigate the qualifications
of possible contractors to write software.  A piece of paper saying that
the state _thinks_ the contractor knows what they're doing is just another
(possibly meaningless) "fact" like a diploma from some college.  Treat it
with a bit less weight than a Consumers Report, but it is another piece of
data to consider in choosing a contractor.  I feel an OPTIONAL 'license'
of this kind would be reasonable.  A contract programmer could consider
wether the marketing value outweighed other concerns about this licensing
issue.

Regarding the X-ray accident, I don't see how licensing would have ANY effect
at all.  Beyond the impossibility of testing all the flavors of programming
in the world  (I'm an 88000 & C embedded system programmer, with a bit of
study I could pass a COBOL exam, but you DON'T want me doing your payroll!)
there's too many issues outside the programmer's control to effectively
legislate safety via licensing.  Only the _organization_ making the X-ray
machine has sufficient control to really minimize the system risk.

Heck, I once had a review where I was deemed 'too methodical' by my
manager (previous job at an industrial control company)  The system I was
working on would (indirectly) control things like robots on an assembly line.
If legislators think they can create safety by decree, they'd better start
thinking how to license entire organisations.  (No I DON'T advocate this,
but these legislators have got to start thinking about how systems are
really developed.)

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Townsend               |   Mail Stop: 5-11
NASA Lewis Research Center   |   Email: fsset@bach.lerc.nasa.gov
Cleveland, Ohio  44135       |