TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Your opinion, please! From:"Richard G. Combs" <richard -dot- combs -at- voyanttech -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:12:24 -0600
Mike O. wrote:
> Well, if it's an FDA-regulated industry, new drugs and devices come out
> weekly with new characteristics. If it's the financial industry, there
> seems to be a new way to steal every week. If it's health care, there
> seem to be new ways to deny coverage or violate your privacy every
> week. So I'm pleased that someone is looking out for the public
> interest. Good that government can keep pace.
Nonsense. New drugs and devices don't require new regulations. In fact,
that's back-asswards. Drugs and devices are developed and tested in
accordance with the _existing_ regulations; they have to be, unless the
developers are required to be prescient.
And why do new ways to steal or violate your privacy require new laws or
regulations if it's already illegal to steal or violate someone's privacy?
This is one of my pet peeves: the relentless and pointless proliferation of
laws and regulations whose sole purpose is to make politicians and
bureaucrats look busy and useful. For instance, why do we need a law against
drive-by shootings? Don't the laws against murder and attempted murder
pretty well cover the situation?
"Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex, intelligent
behavior. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple, stupid
behavior. "
-- Dee Hock, Founder and CEO Emeritus of Visa Corporation, a
$1,750,000,000,000.00 company that you might have heard of.
> Regs are not inherently bad, as long as they are appropriate and
> useful. When I'm flying in an airplane, I want lots of regs on that
> puppy.
Do you really believe that the people running airlines are so evil and/or
short-sighted that they'd be indifferent to having their $50 million planes
fall out of the sky, killing hundreds of their customers at a time? Do you
think the airline CEO who has $10 million in stock options cares less about
whether people think his planes are safe than some bureaucrat in Washington?
Why would you automatically be suspicious of a corporate employee's motives
and trusting of a government employee's motives? Do you think being hired by
the government automatically makes people more moral or less short-sighted?
Are you just naturally suspicious of people acting in their own
self-interest and convinced that government employees act only in the
interest of others?
Just wondering.
Richard
------
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Voyant Technologies, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT voyanttechDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT freeDASHmarketDOTnet
303-777-0436
------
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
