> Confusing the two, accidents vs. attack, is used here because it makes the reader feel superior. We get to mock and feel superior to those stupid software eng

> Confusing the two, accidents vs. attack, is used here because it makes the reader feel superior. We get to mock and feel superior to those stupid software engineers for not living up to what's essentially a fictional standard of reliability. For what it's worth, every single person I saw retweeting and agreeing with that comic was a software engineer, usually with some comment to the effect of "This is the truest thing ever written about programming". The article makes a good point that the comic elided over the distinction between hardening against accidents and attacks, but let's not pretend like software doesn't have hilariously low standards compared to more mature engineering disciplines.