Re: LOCKSMITH'S GUILD WANTS L
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com> wrote:
This assumes that governments have the necessary wisdom to tell a bad architect from a good architect. This does not seem very plausible.
[snip]
While universities often issue or refrain from issuing certificates for corrupt and improper reasons, government supervision on this matter is unlikely to keep them honest
I think you misunderstand the licensing process. The standards for a profession are set by the profession itself. They decide what is an adequate curriculum, for example, and what is an adequate amount of continuing education. They literally write the questions for the licensing exam. They also privately accredit the schools, which is more than adequate to "keep them honest." Then the government administers the exam and issues licenses. The professional associations could do this themselves, making it an entirely private affair, but there remains one function that only government can exert: the government forbids someone without a license from functioning as a professional. In other words, licensing isn't a process of government interference in professions. It's a process of professions seeking governmental imprimateur for their own credentialing process, arguably in the public interest. (YMMV; there may be exceptional professions that just hated the whole idea and were dragged into it kicking and screaming, of which I am unaware.) ObCrypto: It's certainly true that crypto will make it easier to function as a professional without having the credentials. "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a quack." I just see it as something to endure, rather than something to applaud. ______________________________________________________________________ Don Doumakes Finger doumakes@netcom.com for PGP public key Foxpro databases built to your specifications. Email me for details. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLygTahtumcu2AjihAQEb7AP8DRfcZJvLZy8mw7jg6wjrjHeNl1IbP5EW h3en/84ENKB2SbmcIXx7TtEl3jGz6bZ2T7JA7Ed3UYC78lq8/QsTgBW41Sh+arbX /j1o6Sot6jYAs5EGiuiD4OoxhRopDMuoZFt9NyRJfTF68jHP1olsjiLwnV0mq3g4 nRUh71wnFmk= =EjEG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Internet, nobody knows you're a quack." I just see it as something to endure, rather than something to applaud.
Not quite. If the socieities or guilds in question were to wake up to the threat, they could easily have whatever institution issued certificates of passing/degrees/etc. and sign them with their keys. The licensee would then attach his e-diploma to his .plan file for anyone to finger and verify the signature. So, there, on the internet, being a quack and getting away with it doesn't have to happen. :-)
participants (2)
-
doumakes@netcom.com -
rarachel@prism.poly.edu