3 ms·
At the same time, it's important to keep Murphy's law in mind. That doesn't mean you should let yourself be immobalized by the worst case, but you need to make
by j_baker 17y ago
At the same time, it's important to keep Murphy's law in mind. That doesn't mean you should let yourself be immobalized by the worst case, but you need to make a conscious decision that the worst case isn't worth worrying about. Don't write something off because you feel it will never happen. Assume that it will go wrong and decide if the cost of dealing with it is greater than the cost of preventing it.
- ryanelkins 17y ago>decide if the cost of dealing with it is greater than the cost of preventing it Yes. I build small apps for various tasks at my current job and am always surprised at how bullet proof they want the thing to be. I spend the majority of my time trying to safely handle the remotest of issues for these apps which are mostly fairly trivial (not operationally critical) if they stop working. I find it especially amusing because we host our entire operation off a single box in our own network closet. In other words, make sure you take care of all the simple things that have a much higher chance for disruptive error before you start worrying about the once in a lifetime catastrophic ones.
- khafra 17y agoOnce you reduce the risks of action to the point where not acting is the worst case scenario, go for it.
- billswift 17y agoNot quite right. Decide if the cost of it happening multiplied by the risk of it happening is more than the cost of preventing it or insuring against it. Always remember to factor in the risk of it happening or you are going to waste a lot of time and money insuring against unlikely dangers.