Um... Does anyone else see the repo owner?
These lists made sense in 2000-2010 when programmers had the autonomy ( in most corporations ) to decide on what feature to develop and how it should behave.
This hasn't been the case since the industry introduced roles such as product owner.
I've had to implement my fair share of anti patterns that I was fully aware would degrade the experience for the user. At the end of the day, the programmers have been reduced to essentially blue color workers that just do whatever the MBAs decide on.
Papa Smurf will not be pleased to hear about this.
Falsehoods programmers believe?
Perhaps it’s possible you didn’t do enough to explain why you didn’t believe it was the right work to do, or if you did, perhaps there were other factors in play than “user experience.”
Also, uh, “I have to do what my boss says” doesn’t make you a blue collar worker.
I know, I was exaggerating. I thought it was clear from my usage of the word "essentially".
> perhaps there were other factors in play than “user experience.”
Of course there were. There always are - chief among them the profitability, because selling the customer on stuff they didn't need is profitable. Especially if you frame it "right".
But that example is completely unrelated to this case, to very little value in getting deeper into it.
No, but it does make you a non-professional. The distinction between professionals and non-professionals is that members of professions have ethical obligations above and beyond their obligation to their employer.
You will not find lawyers willing to perjure themselves, accountants to cook your books, or civil engineers happy to sign off on deadly designs.
In contrast, software "engineers" are not professionals, we are hired goons and you can easily find a software monkey ready to build whatever atrocity you want for the right price.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxe9g0el8epo
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/practice/general-practice/ac...
You will struggle to find any similar news stories for "software engineer jailed for implementing dark patterns"
And probably because that's not illegal.
Unintentionally revealing comment here. Software goons have no concept of professional ethics and will do any terrible thing you pay them to do.
I'm going to stop here because this is just an exercise in silly faux ignorance on your part.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/tesco-fraud...
“The three defendants who are on trial in this case are not the foot soldiers who misconducted themselves. The defendants in this case are the generals – those who are in positions of trust, and who were paid huge compensation packages in order to safeguard the financial health of Tesco.
“These defendants encouraged the manipulation of profits and indeed pressurised others working under their control to misconduct themselves in such a way that the stock market was ultimately misled.”"
> [...] ethical obligations above and beyond their obligation to their employer. You will not find lawyers willing [on behalf of their employer] to perjure themselves [...]
but based on their response to your the examples, :shrug:.
[Many/most ethical] accountants [who are not committing malpractice] will tell their employer, "no, I can't sign off on those fraudulent financial statements," but software developers [as a community, I'm sure someone will pop up with one colorful example] will not tell their employer, "No, I won't run fake bots on the site to inflate our user numbers," or "No, I won't implement this browser fingerprinting to violate our users' privacy."
The sibling commenter seems to be willfully misreading this as "all lawyers are ethical"
edit: i gotta change my first guess that it will be modified soon. google does not set the goal to not be evil, so they'll likely just leave the repo as-is, unattended.
quote: 1. An individual has a phone number
Some people do not own phones, or do not wish to provide you with their telephone number when asked. Do not require a user to provide a phone number unless it is essential, and whenever possible try to provide a fallback to accommodate these users.