> Most professional disciplines have very carefully written codes of
> ethics. The role of the individual is to apply that code of ethics
> conscientiously, not to write his own.
> Interestingly enough, "we" (Computing Professionals) have at least two such
> codes of ethics - one produced by ACM, one by IEEE - how many contemporary
> software developers even know they exist, let alone have read them?
Our students are required to read the ACM Code of Ethics (which I don't
really like much - it's too squishy), the IEEE Code of Ethics - which
is brief and to the point - and, best of all, the IEEE-CS/ACM Software
Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice.
Have a look at http://www.acm.org/serving/se/code.htm
We discuss these in class periodically in the curriculum, starting
with the intro courses.
> >Ron tends to paint his pictures with a "very" broad brush,
> I hope you now see a little more of the detail.
> >when the actual world does not live in his Ivory tower.
> By "actual world" I suppose you mean the overwhelming majority of "current
> working environments for software developers". I haven't a clue what you
> mean by "Ivory tower". However, if my interpretation of "actual world" is
> even close, I would say they do not "live by" anything remotely close to
> professionalism, by any reasonable understanding of the term
> "professional". The evidence is clear. Look at all that sucky software
> and the almost total absence of quality software. :)
I'm going to jump to Ron's defense here and point out that before going
into teaching at Cal Poly, he spent a fair number of years in industry.
Sometimes Ron's rhetoric is a bit...well...overheated, but it comes from
experience on both sides of the street. I've known Ron for many years -
he may be many things (most of which are likable) but he definitely is
NOT an ivory-tower academic!