🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <46549@netnews.upenn.edu>, yee@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes:
 ...
>  >    An astonished software industry is moving to stop a programmer licensing
>  >bill that is already halfway to becoming law in New Jersey.
 ...
> Ok, I'll bite.  What's the problem?  Licensing merely mandates a minimum
> level of competency.  Many other professions have licensing procedures
> for exactly that reason.

That is a rather naive characterization of professional licensing.

Licenses are generally granted by boards composed of practioners who
hold the license that they are empowered to grant.  Membership on these
boards is by political appointment.  The reason why professional
licensing was invented--and one of the reasons why it can persist--is
that licensing is a politically sellable mechanism for protecting the
profitability of a profession by controlling the number and the character
of its practitioners.  Why do you suppose that professionals vigorously
support a limitation on their ability to freely pursue their occupations?
The moniker has changed from "guild" to "profession", and the techniques
have grown more subtle and sophisticated, while the practice and effect
remain roughly the same.

Whether this is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing is a different topic.
 
	 ...jay