Re: The Recent Trend in "Collective Contracts"

[John Deters <jad@dsddhc.com>]

At 08:06 AM 7/11/97 EDT, dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) wrote:
>Tim May <tcmay@got.net> writes:
>> These "guilds" are an interesting case of self-policing where there is no
>> option for opting out. (I don't believe it is possible to practice law or
>> medicine without approval/licensing from these kinds of
>> organizations/guilds.)
>
>It is a CRIME is most jurisdictions.
>
>> Licensing in general is something I think is getting out of hand.
>
>Actually, licensing is a neat idea that leads to more efficient markets.
>E.g., New York State licenses plumbers, contractors, barbers, etc; if
>you enter into a contract with an unlicensed party for one of these
>services, it won't be enforced by the state court. E.g. you can't
>sue the unlicensed bricklayer for laying your bricks crooked, and he
>can't sue you for not paying. :-) Here the state just says, if you
>want our jurisdiction, you play by our rules and you pay a fee.

How does this make for a more "efficient" market?  All I see is increased
costs of doing business (paying for the licensing), and increased costs to
the consumer (hiring a licensed contractor).  The benefit?  You're allowed
to invite the government into disputes.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the theory behind licensing.  It implies
that the licenseholder is proficient at his or her task (or at least was
when the license was granted.)  This can be important to public safety, in
that a shoddy electrician could cause a fire that could burn an entire
block, or that a hygenically-challenged barber could transmit nasty virii
via unsterilized scissors.  

Public Safety is therefore served.  But where does the efficiency come from?

--

The self-policing guilds Tim mentions above exist because even the law
recognizes that it is unable to adequately define the boundaries within
which a physician must operate.  (You'd think lawyers would be able to get
it down legally on paper, but then there'd be no more need for congress
(spit) and they'd be out of jobs...)  They take on the function of an
electrician's license, since there's no "National Physicians Code" to
measure them by.

Let's apply it to us.  Take the case of a programmer who writes the code
for an electronic defibrillator.  Obviously, the code needs to be
"perfect", or else the machine might deliver a lethal shock.  Who should
write it?  A "licensed" programmer?  A member of the ACM?  A graduate of
MIT?  J Random StreetPerson?  

Let's say it fails in operation, killing a patient.  It's shown that faulty
code is responsible.  Do we yank the programmer's license, or his
membership in the ACM?  Contact MIT and revoke his diploma?  Sue MIT for
granting him one in the first place?  Put him back on the streets?  

What if it's the fault of the VisualSnozz++ compiler?  Can we go back and
pull Microsoft's coder's ACM membership?  Take away his license to code?
Pull the original coder's license for failing to use a compiler written by
an ACM certified professional?  Put Bill Gates in jail for selling it?

Would membership in the ACM be "proof" to an employer that this person
would produce "bug-free" software?  Would they bond and insure their code,
etc.?

The big questions, then, are:
Does regulation fit our industry?  If so, where?
Will I be kicked out of the ACM for writing non-GAKked encryption software?
 ...for posting to cypherpunks in support of non-GAKked software?
...for having an incorrect political viewpoint?  A conviction for
thoughtcrime?

John
--
J. Deters "Don't think of Windows programs as spaghetti code.  Think
          of them as 'Long sticky pasta objects in ActiveX sauce'."
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NET:   mailto:jad@dsddhc.com (work)   mailto:jad@pclink.com (home) |
| PSTN:  1 612 375 3116 (work)          1 612 894 8507 (home)        |
| ICBM:  44^58'36"N by 93^16'27"W Elev. ~=290m (work)                |
| For my public key, send mail with the exact subject line of:       |
| Subject: get pgp key                                               |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+