Right. If the coding industry mimics the construction industry, we wind up with one position called engineer that assumes most of the liability.
The other 99.99....% of software engineers will get different titles.
All of this ignores the individuals who are most responsible for these catastrophes.
Investors and executives deliver relentless and effective pressure toward practices that maximize their profits - at the expense of all else.
They purposefully create + nurture a single point of failure and are massively rewarded for the harm that causes (while the consequences are suffered by everyone else). Thanks to the pass they reliably get, we get their leadership design degrading every industry it can.
> If their sign off is required, this could work. The question is whether it’s worth it, and if it is, in which contexts.
Civil engineers liability is tied to standards set by gov agencies/depts and industry consortium.
Standards would have to be created in software engineering - along with the associated gov & industry bodies. In civil engineering, those things grew during/from many decades of need.
The other 99.99....% of software engineers will get different titles.
All of this ignores the individuals who are most responsible for these catastrophes.
Investors and executives deliver relentless and effective pressure toward practices that maximize their profits - at the expense of all else.
They purposefully create + nurture a single point of failure and are massively rewarded for the harm that causes (while the consequences are suffered by everyone else). Thanks to the pass they reliably get, we get their leadership design degrading every industry it can.