Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mel.aone.net.au!gsms01.alcatel.oz.au!cett.alcatel-alsthom.fr!slsv6bt!news
From: kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de (James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763)
Subject: Re: Certification of Computer Scientists
In-Reply-To: "W. Wesley Groleau"'s message of 6 Sep 1995 18:54:31 GMT
Message-ID: <KANZE.95Sep7125129@slsvhdt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>
Lines: 36
Sender: news@lts.sel.alcatel.de
Organization: SEL
References: <3srsn5$q8d@galaxy.ucr.edu> <403rf1$i1d@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au>
	<4092db$n3n@martha.utk.edu> <40jbpr$j6r@steel.interlog.com>
	<40ucle$8tt@tiber.uoknor.edu> <40vf1e$vv@tokamak.viewlogic.com>
	<qqhh3bawo8.fsf@tartarus.ucsd.edu> <41tm9n$575@jefferson.fairfield.com>
	<tonyk-3008950814040001@dial1-21.cybercom.net>
	<1995Aug30.151046.11485@pat.uwe.ac.uk>
	<42i13a$gk9@locutus.rchland.ibm.com> <42kqp7$dlq@reuters2.mitre.org>
Date: 07 Sep 1995 10:51:29 GMT
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.edu:14122 comp.lang.ada:34584 comp.lang.c++:147833 comp.lang.modula2:12544 comp.lang.scheme:13674

In article <42kqp7$dlq@reuters2.mitre.org> "W. Wesley Groleau"
<wgroleau@lear.mitre.org> writes:

|> lr-lang@csm.uwe.ac.uk (Bob Lang 3P21 x3172) writes:
|> >|> As a cynical and experienced programmer, I wonder ...

|> xzz0529@honker.rchland.ibm.com (Jonathan Allan) wrote:
|> >One of the standards orgs, IEEE?, had a "code of conduct"
|> >for the professional which indicated the professional 
|> >programmer was *required* to bring bad process to the 
|> >employers attention...

|> As a cynical and experienced programmer, I wonder how many
|> people can blow THAT whistle and keep their jobs....  

The code of conduct said: ``to the EMPLOYER'S attention'' (emphesis
mine).  In many (most) cases, the employer will simply ignore the
warnings.

I remember reading about the code of conduct after the Challenger
explosion.  Several engineers in one of the suppying firms *did*
inform their employer that there was something like a 50-60% chance of
the Challenger exploding in the given conditions.  The employer (if I
remember right) did not feel it necessary to inform NASA.  The
question at the time was: did the engineers have a moral
responsibility to informe NASA directly (going behind their employees
back), and get fired?

I believe that a whole issue of Spectrum was devoted to the question.
-- 
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils en informatique industrielle --
                              -- Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung


