[adityab]

I disagree.

Titles exist to provide an assurance to people that the services they get from title-holders will be above a certain standard, with the threat of a serious penalty if the work is sloppy.

This is the social expectation in many societies.

If I find that a doctor doesn't sterilize needles or wash hands, they should face a penalty (regardless of whether it actually caused damage). We shouldn't have to specify up-front in some contract that we want them to follow $RULES as a set of deliverables. This stuff is therefore regulated.

I used to think differently, but now I feel that software engineers should be similarly regulated. That doesn't mean everyone will now have to follow a ton of regulations to slap together the next nodejs app, those people can still be called developers. But whoever is an "engineer" should ensure that the work is well thought-out and should stop the developers they supervise from moving fast and breaking things.

It's time the industry "grew up" as a whole. If "software is eating the world", we need to be damn sure it's not sloppy.

[wildmusings]

I think we actually agree on the need for regulation. I just don't think being subject to regulation is necessary to be considered an "engineer".