4 ms·

Well...I'd say that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 has become much more notorious than the Arianne launch; but

Well...I'd say that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 has become much more notorious than the Arianne launch; but it's also a UX fault, not a straight-out software error.

dkbrk 11y ago
Yep, also I would say that Heartbleed is definitely deserving of a place.
- basseq 11y ago
  I agree, Heartbleed is a big miss. Before reading the article, the two that came to mind were Y2K and Heartbleed. Notwithstanding all the recent security breeches (e.g., Ashley Madison, Sony) that could be attributed to "bugs".
  - gherkin0 11y ago
    If you're limiting it to the "The 5 Most Infamous Software Bugs in History," Heartbleed is definitely out. It just happened to be recent, so it has an outsized place in people's minds. Including it would sort of be like those foolish "Top 100 bands of all time" lists that have the Beatles at #1, followed by 85 bands from the last 15 years. As others have noted, the big miss is the Therac-25 bug, which is pretty commonly taught in Software Engineering/Computer Science classes the example of how intangible software can kill people.
- forgottenpass 11y ago
  Many more-interesting bugs than Heartbleed have existed. If Heartbleed is notable, it is largely as a study in the success of branding and marketing campaigns for security bugs. Or being the straw to break the camel's back on openssl cleanup efforts.
Zenst 11y ago
Agree and also would of thought they would have a sensor on patient that measures dosage independently of the system giving the dosage. But from what I can tell - they do not.
- Someone1234 11y ago
  How would you sense that without risking either deflecting the beam (which could cause harm/cancers in other body parts) or reducing the beam's intensity (which could cause treatment to be less effective). This is one of those ideas that sounds a lot easier than it likely is.
  - rprospero 11y ago
    My assumption is that you'd put the sensor behind the patient. After the beam has been through the body, you don't care if it's deflected or reduced. Obviously, it's too late at that point to prevent the beam from hitting the patient, but you'll know that something went wrong and can lock the system until the problem is found.
    - randlet 11y ago
      Many (most?) modern linear accelerators have imaging panels behind the beam path (see image [1]) which could be used for dose monitoring although they are primarily used for imaging purposes. I'm not sure whether any of these are currently used for dose monitoring. [1] http://tommytoy.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e2ed7f81970b-800wi http://tommytoy.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e2ed7f8...
      - FiatLuxDave 11y ago
        Yes, EPID panels are indeed used for dose monitoring and quality assurance of the dose delivery to the patient [1][2]. However, this is relatively new in the industry and is not universal. The fact that EPIDs have become so common (since Varian and Elekta like to offer them as standard) means that this will be used more as time goes on. As an aside, TLDs and IVD systems are falling out of favor for patient dose monitoring because AAPM TG 62 (referenced in the link in your other post) is not directly applicable to IMRT and VMAT modalities, which are pretty common these days. [1]http://www.sunnuclear.com/medphys/patientqa/epidose/epidose.asp http://www.sunnuclear.com/medphys/patientqa/epidose/epidose.... [2]http://www.sunnuclear.com/snc_site/solutions/patientqa/perfraction http://www.sunnuclear.com/snc_site/solutions/patientqa/perfr...
derrickdirge 11y ago
An unhandled race condition disfigured and killed human beings. That earns it a spot at the top of the list IMO.

dkbrk 11y ago

Yep, also I would say that Heartbleed is definitely deserving of a place.

basseq 11y ago
I agree, Heartbleed is a big miss. Before reading the article, the two that came to mind were Y2K and Heartbleed. Notwithstanding all the recent security breeches (e.g., Ashley Madison, Sony) that could be attributed to "bugs".
- gherkin0 11y ago
  If you're limiting it to the "The 5 Most Infamous Software Bugs in History," Heartbleed is definitely out. It just happened to be recent, so it has an outsized place in people's minds. Including it would sort of be like those foolish "Top 100 bands of all time" lists that have the Beatles at #1, followed by 85 bands from the last 15 years. As others have noted, the big miss is the Therac-25 bug, which is pretty commonly taught in Software Engineering/Computer Science classes the example of how intangible software can kill people.
forgottenpass 11y ago
Many more-interesting bugs than Heartbleed have existed. If Heartbleed is notable, it is largely as a study in the success of branding and marketing campaigns for security bugs. Or being the straw to break the camel's back on openssl cleanup efforts.

Zenst 11y ago

Agree and also would of thought they would have a sensor on patient that measures dosage independently of the system giving the dosage. But from what I can tell - they do not.

Someone1234 11y ago
How would you sense that without risking either deflecting the beam (which could cause harm/cancers in other body parts) or reducing the beam's intensity (which could cause treatment to be less effective). This is one of those ideas that sounds a lot easier than it likely is.
- rprospero 11y ago
  My assumption is that you'd put the sensor behind the patient. After the beam has been through the body, you don't care if it's deflected or reduced. Obviously, it's too late at that point to prevent the beam from hitting the patient, but you'll know that something went wrong and can lock the system until the problem is found.
  - randlet 11y ago
    Many (most?) modern linear accelerators have imaging panels behind the beam path (see image [1]) which could be used for dose monitoring although they are primarily used for imaging purposes. I'm not sure whether any of these are currently used for dose monitoring. [1] http://tommytoy.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e2ed7f81970b-800wi http://tommytoy.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e2ed7f8...
    - FiatLuxDave 11y ago
      Yes, EPID panels are indeed used for dose monitoring and quality assurance of the dose delivery to the patient [1][2]. However, this is relatively new in the industry and is not universal. The fact that EPIDs have become so common (since Varian and Elekta like to offer them as standard) means that this will be used more as time goes on. As an aside, TLDs and IVD systems are falling out of favor for patient dose monitoring because AAPM TG 62 (referenced in the link in your other post) is not directly applicable to IMRT and VMAT modalities, which are pretty common these days. [1]http://www.sunnuclear.com/medphys/patientqa/epidose/epidose.asp http://www.sunnuclear.com/medphys/patientqa/epidose/epidose.... [2]http://www.sunnuclear.com/snc_site/solutions/patientqa/perfraction http://www.sunnuclear.com/snc_site/solutions/patientqa/perfr...

derrickdirge 11y ago

An unhandled race condition disfigured and killed human beings. That earns it a spot at the top of the list IMO.