3 ms·
Or for software not to get written in the first place.
by kobeya 10y ago
Or for software not to get written in the first place.
- goodplay 10y ago>Or for [buggy] software not to get written in the first place. FTFY We place too much trust and rely too much on computer systems these days to have the luxury to write software like we used to.
- kobeya 10y agoNo don't twist my words. I meant I'm sure as hell not inventing something new if it sets me up for civil liabilities. It would kill innovation.
- goodplay 10y ago> meant I'm sure as hell not inventing something new if it sets me up for civil liabilities. And I'm arguing that not doing so might be a good thing. I shudder to think how we'd be off if other infrastructure disciplines took the same approach we take to develop software. If you build something that people use in important infrastructure, prepare to be on the hook if it fails.
- kobeya 10y agoSo if you write some toy PID controller for your kids LEGO project and post it to stack overflow, should you be held liable for all the places it is used?
- goodplay 10y agoI don't think a person should be held liable in this case because the solution was clearly labeled as a toy, and not as a serious solution. If this person presented it as a real solution, however, then yes I believe he should be held liable, as much as a lawyer would be for recklessly giving out legal advice. In either case, The developer who built upon the solution without validating it or verifying its correctness should bear most of the blame, regardless of how the answer was given.
- aurelianito 10y agoIf the security externalities impose on the society a burden that is bigger than the benefit provided by the software not writing it in the first place seems like a good idea.