3 ms·
> "it’d be morally unacceptable to allow public deployment of software that has not been sufficiently tested" Does "sufficiently tested" mean you get the end-p
by jamiequint 9y ago
> "it’d be morally unacceptable to allow public deployment of software that has not been sufficiently tested"
Does "sufficiently tested" mean you get the end-product a year later? What if the end-product saves 10,000 lives a year? In that case what cost is morally acceptable to get there a year faster?
- thorell 9y agoYou can't project the actual cost without sufficient testing.
- rootlocus 9y ago> What if the end-product saves 10,000 lives a year? You can't have the certainty to make such statements without "sufficiently testing" the product.
- jamiequint 9y ago> You can't have the certainty to make such statements Can you point me to where I made a statement? I only see questions.
- rootlocus 9y agoYou're misinterpreting me. I meant "nobody" can make that such statements. As in, if you (somebody) have a a product and you (somebody) haven't tested it enough, you (somebody) can't state that it will save N lives per year.