The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Purina (Nestlè, IIRC) is incredibly strict on anything. Usually the biggest names are maniacal regarding the safety of their products. Most of small-time producers, some of them property of big multinationals but under different (and cheaper) brands on the other hand...
Many food manifacturers don't really care if the products they sell are contaminated with glass shards or stone fragments.
Perhaps that is cultural.
In the US they do care because real cases of contamination can lead to a decrease in profits. Continued problems (repeats) can lead to brand depreciation that can last for years. That is because there are always competitors and people are willing to pay more if they think there is a quality difference (which there realistically would be if one product continued to be contaminated.)
My company is providing software interfaces for the car industry.
If there were no regulations we would get a lot more work to adjust for every car brand, that could possibly make us prohibitively expensive.
Standardization is a good thing.
But what every company wants is a monopoly situation on their services.
Just look at Apple, works really fine within their own acosystem. A pain to connect to others.
I work on controllers for environmental testing, and while some industries, such as automotive, probably wouldn't if there weren't federal safety regulations, we do work in enough industries that we'd still be doing this if there weren't federal laws.
The insurance industry was around prior to government regulations. Granted it's gotten a lot more regulated since WWII but it existed prior to that. Lloyds of London has been insuring shipping companies since before the rise of the steam engine.
I work for a payroll provider, as a software developer.
I would argue that, if not for federal and state laws and regulations, most if not all of the "information technology" industry would not exist. I mean, how hard is it to pay people when they provide a good or service? If you don't have to report to several other parties (the IRS, state and city tax authorities, EEOC, SEC, etc. ad ridiculum), paper record keeping is sufficient, even for very large companies, and it was so until well into the 1970's.
Yes, computers are really cool. Yes, the Internet is a thing. Yes, computers are useful and necessary for space travel, modern product design, scientific research, etc.
But would any of that happened at all if the damn government didn't require massive amounts of information about things that, in a proper society, shouldn't be any of their damned business?
Freedom? That is a worship word.
-- Cloud William
The only thing a free man can be forced to do is die.
I work for small companies. All of which are IMPACTED by Federal Laws, but none of which are created by more than Property Rights, and demands of consumers.
One client exists because Federal Laws make importing plants very very expensive/laborious/time consuming, so he brokers deals. But again, it's to get AROUND the impact of the laws, not to serve them. Also, it makes sense to have someone specialize in maintaining these relationships, as opposed to every tiny nursery doing it themselves. (For the record, we have good reason to quarantine, and control this. Red army ants, and Kudzu being 2 disastrous examples of what can get into a country)
Can we avoid the impact of Federal Laws? Not really. And that's sad. Property Rights, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Association should rule.
My company builds handheld software for security and safety. Some of our clients are government clients that are trying to check a box, but the majority truly want improve safety for their employees, better efficiency, and better security.
It is one of the great benefits of starting your own company. You can walk away from red tape and projects you feel are not advancing human productivity.
I'm an independent consultant, so I cover pretty much all industry's, in all sectors.
I do write a lot of software, which at the moment is mostly LOB Web Apps in dotnet core for a few different industries, I also do a lot of R&D projects where I'm tasked with working out new ways of doing stuff.
However, I could also be classed as being in an industry that does depend on Lawyers and all that jazz, but not directly.
I write books, and do training courses, so a lot of what I do in that respect means that if it wasn't for you lot that work because of the lawyers etc, I'd have a lot less work, in producing materials that you use.
weren't for lawyers, lawsuits, and government mandated requirements
The reality is that contract law needs to exist because there is no practical way to contractually define all possibilities. So disputes about what was meant and what is fair will always arise. There is no other possibility (not with humans.)
And for that to be real a legal system must exist. And if one allows that to be financed by markets then there is an increased perception that economic biases will exist and likely that they actually will exist. Thus a third party would always be required to maintain that. Since there are other needs for legal systems using a single source for all of that is efficient. Which leads to a government running the courts.