If you fail to write it accurately (in the sense you mean) it's not science fiction. It's fantasy.
European starlings, or African starlings?
No. That is not how psychology works.
Certainly not. Since psychology doesn't work. Period.
See, what you're missing is simply that it's turtles all the way down.
You want to find the scape goat for a security glitch.
Who is at fault?
The guy who coded it?
What wasn't it double checked?
Was the product rushed out?
Was the product used for its original use?
Making it a licensed profession will not improve quality, it will make sure programmer salaries stay high (a good thing), but also reduce startups and new ideas.
Now it may be more prudent to have the software certified as secure from an outside certificate who isn't paid by the software maker, that will analyze the software on many fronts including source analysis.
It isn't the software that is the danger point. It is piss poor management culture in health care.
Granted medical software is decades behind the time compared to other sectors. But it is because health care management culture just doesn't get IT.
There are doctors with their ego, who think med school makes them qualified in all things.
Then you get higher ups in the business areas who need to pick and choose the fights with the doctors because most of the stuff they want is purely stupid or unreasonable. Plus these guys have their ego to contend with.
So they compromise. Now don't get me wrong knowing when to compromising is a good thing, however when it becomes your management bread and butter it creates solutions that everyone dislikes.
IT in health care is compromised because leadership just makes compromises with everyone.
Often the Rouge deployments is due IT not being responsive enough or letting other departments behind while focusing more on others.
Those IT Guys they don't like us Sales folks, the engineering groups gets all the new technology while we get this old stuff. Well we have a budget we will subscribe to this web site that does what we wanted and tried to request for software for year, but was ignored by IT.
Of course it is easy to show how blind management is, However it IT guys are not blame less.
IT has a history of the following bad behavior, that would make management want to find a way to slim its IT Staff.
1. Personal pet projects: This is often a business related project, however there are alternatives that may work better, however it IT worker is too emotionally interested in keeping it going, then giving it up for a better solution. Hanging on to the couple features that has that the others do not.
2. Attempts to make you "Irreplaceable": Sure that program your infrastructure you support is impressive, and perhaps no one else currently will want to touch it with a ten foot pole, and it is your baby, that is keeping the organization running. However in case of accidental death or injury the company is in a bad place, so they will want a better solution. And BTW just because people don't want to touch it, if they have to they can and will be able to maintain it, no matter how hard you make it.
3. Failing to project in the future: If they move to a cloud service, then your job is antiquated. However have you been future proofing yourself. Realizing the role you need to take after that particular feature moves away?
Now I am not trying to blame us IT guys for every stupid business decision... However you need to realize our personal bad behaviors do get noticed up, and influences business decisions.
I think you may have missed my point. Perhaps another read, with special attention paid to my closing assessment of "tempest in a teakettle."
Well, some of us prefer hard science fiction to the squishy stuff.
I honestly rue the day the all-inclusive crowd decided to re-designate SF as "speculative fiction." All fiction is speculative as it is all an exercise in what-if. The difference between hard science fiction and the rest, as I see it, is that based upon the objective reality currently understood at the time of authorship, the hard stuff is actually within the realm of known possibilities, because, you know, science. I find that to be a significant enough distinction to distinguish these works from those containing gods, elves, magicians, macro teleportation, ESP and so on.
That is in no way to imply that the squishy stuff cannot be fine work -- it most certainly can, and often is. But the bottom line for me is that it is different on a fundamental level, providing a different kind of experience from, say, "The Martian" or the technically flawed, but scientifically sound, "Red Mars."
Doesn't matter to me personally who, or what, gets a Hugo, or why. I'm sitting about ten feet from three of them, and the shine has worn off after decades of observing the process. All I'm saying is that if hard science fiction is of such consequence to these people that they feel awards should be proffered in that specific category, there are doors that are open, or could be opened. Assuming the story is at all accurate, which, from the other comments here... it very well may not be.
I think you were meant this as a joke. Larger Screen, mouse and keyboard you don't have a tablet but a standard PC, running a baby mobile OS.
Summary aside, if there really is an objection to the range of science fiction stories that the Hugos are currently addressing these days, then I can see two reasonable solutions, either or both of which may already exist:
1) hugos specific to the category being awarded: e.g. "hard science fiction"
2) another award entirely -- which means publicity, fan gathering, etc. Lots of work.
It seems like a tempest in a teakettle to me.
I think a key motive is simple.
Try to get people from using cheap Walmart wi-fi routers and get something more reliable.
Because most people will blame their ISP or website if their wi-fi sucks.
With a good connection that means more you tube and allows Google to implement more streaming type services.
Dr. Who universe is very complex, so most issues get explained away.
However they often are full of Easter eggs of the past shows. From doctor 11 showing an out of date library card from the 1960s with doctor 1 face.
But they don't always (but sometimes they do) explain the change in the quality of effects over the years.
The road to ruin is always in good repair, and the travellers pay the expense of it. -- Josh Billings