Comment by spacebanana7
3 years ago
> Software Engineering as a regulated profession is going to be a necessity as much as civil engineering or electrical engineering has been
Wouldn’t it be easier to regulate the quality of software used in critical products?
AFAIK similar regulatory standards and certifications exist for aerospace software.
It technically exists:
ISO26262 - "Road vehicles – Functional safety"
But it's not nearly as prescriptive as what you have in DO-178C for example.
Nevertheless most of these telematics systems are not "considered" safety-critical in a hazard analysis unless you have OTA updates or something similar so large chunks of of 26262 would also not be applicable.
>Wouldn’t it be easier to regulate the quality of software used in critical products?
Sure, but who is responsible/accountable?
Often times I bring this topic up to have a bunch of people looking for gotchas in my overly broad wishful thinking. I don't want Engineers to be a requirement to work in software as a whole. I don't even think being an "Engineer" makes you better in any functional way than your peers. But I do believe in ideas of accountability, responsibility, ownership, and all the legalese involved with taking that seriously.
If the software is holding people's personal info, say to the point where a leak would constitute real risk, I want a Software Engineer stamping the security design to show they follow best practices and the company isn't taking shortcuts. If the software is controlling a robot that could maim someone, I want to know that some intern wasn't the one signing off to say its safe.
We aren't there yet. And there's lots of work that needs to be done to get us there. I recognize that. But I want to keep putting the bug in people's ears to have that thought for the years that come as we watch more software glitches cause harm to people, to the environment.