It's exactly our elitism that cause all of this shit.
Imagine if all people were able to read, understand and modify the code of the software they use.
No startup could gain VC money with insecure garbage and zero oversight.
No judge would trust a neural network to categorize people.
Everybody would fully understand who try to manipulate them through software or "because software works so".
OK, so you're proposing a professional credentialing system that empowers people with a special membership card to do a lightweight review and not sweat the details ...
But security in code depends upon every link in the chain being strong, not just some of them ...
So your credentialed experts will mostly give you a warm fuzzy feeling, not the guarantees that you claim to want.
Explain to me again exactly what the huge benefit is?
We shouldn't trust software in critical applications that isn't vetted by certified professionals, but there is a lot of ground between your typical open source project and those critical applications that ought to be littered with those certified professionals.
Not least, we need to train a bunch of people on proper programming grammar.
Most people get training in how to use their native language effectively for 10 or more years before they are let loose into the world.
If we could get that degree of training into programming, *then* we could probably trust the crowd more.
That's an entirely different statement that has no bearing whatsoever on credentialing.
Moreover, it raises important questions: What is insecure? At what level can it be declared to be meaningfully secure? And what constitutes willfulness at this point?
Does a teenager putting a webcam online get to spend quality time with Bubba, Tiny and Thor?
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!