&gt; The conversation should go like this:<p>I think you&#x27;re missing the end to that conversation:<p>&gt;PM: &quot;Ok, we don&#x27;t have 6 weeks. I can give you 4, but we&#x27;re just gonna have to make do.&quot;<p>&gt; Dev: &quot;Okay, which features would you like to cut?&quot;<p>PM: We can&#x27;t cut any of them. We need features A,B,C in the product and we need it in 4 weeks.<p>Here we insert a rant from the PM about one of the following:<p>1) Leadership<p>2) Hard work<p>3) Threats about job security<p>4) Recalling that one time you delivered something ahead of schedule so why is this different<p>5) I see you getting up to get coffee at least twice a day so stop goofing off and get it done<p>I think you&#x27;re vastly overestimating how much power&#x2F;control said Dev has over the whole process at these sorts of companies.<p>Sure, they can quit, but if they felt empowered to quit they probably wouldn&#x27;t be there in the first place: I don&#x27;t think anyone&#x27;s busting down the door to work at MedicalBusinessTM.<p>&gt;  we should require licensing for working on safety-critical applications.<p>Fully agreed, though with some misgivings.<p>Incorporating safety-critical software into the &quot;professional engineering&quot; spectrum would almost certainly require some things that are seen as near-heresy to the software community, like requiring a 4-year degree from an ABET-accredited program.<p>Still, I agree.