in reply to Developer Accountability

And why should anyone listen to us? More precisely, if we say to do one thing, and profitable behaviour is something else, expect people to do what is profitable. And that is what Declan misses. Unless you have incentives that make the socially desired behaviour also the profitable one, you will see companies consistently misbehave.

For background read Why Information Security is Hard - An Economic Perspective. (Taken from Economics and Security.)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Developer Accountability
by cacharbe (Curate) on Apr 30, 2003 at 13:38 UTC

    So true. One of the reasons why I said "Tough Subject"

    And just for clarification. Declan didn't write it, he distributed it. The article itself was written by PETER SVENSSON AP Technology Writer

    C-.

    ---
    Flex the Geek

[reply]
      Just for further clarification, where I talked about what I think Declan missed, I was referring to his comment at the top of this.

      As for the article, it was pretty generic for the brand. The one thing that stands out in it is the mention of the Sustainable Computing Consortium. I mistrust their goals. (See also.)

      For those who didn't follow the links, the SCC is obstensibly a consortium of companies which are trying to create programming standards to assist the maintainability of software. A laudable goal to be sure. But to many cynical people it seems more like the real purpose is to create pressure to allow it to set the agenda on development standards for the goverment, allowing its members to get a significant edge on lucrative development contracts. Which is a much less laudable goal...

[reply]

In Section Meditations