chickenbittle
That's what I mean by lacking understanding of even the basic fundamentals and it would be hard to guess where to even begin with you since it's obvious you'll not interested in learning.
Like that amateur stumbling upon that never-repeating tile recently.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/hobbyist-finds-maths-elusive-...
It still required academics to confirm it (and I think realize it's significants).
In short it's okay to be an academic and it's also okay to be an amateur investigator. Both can and do contribute to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge.
Crackpottery and pseudoscience not so much.
I used "gatekeeping" because that is the term you called it. It's your assumption that professional licenses are there to just 'gatekeep'.
And thinking this is about a 'Developer License' instead of an 'Engineering License' indicates your lack of understanding.
A Professional License for 'Software Engineering' would not be the same as making anyone that wants to develop or write software for a living need a license. Again, this indicates your lack of understanding or awareness of fundamentals.
Why perceive it that way? Nothing wrong with not knowing something or being mistaken in understaning.
To explain the fundamentals to you I'd have to know where you are starting from and it might be an exhausting use of my time.
The way you've communicated so far indicates that it wouldn't be an effective use of my time.
"The industry doesn't need a bunch of self-serving people who could decide who should write, deploy, release programs and who shouldn't. "
Comments like this display a lack of understanding how regulations actually work in practice along with mistaking the protections that a license brings as being just used by "self serving individuals".
Maybe more "gatekeeping" is needed.