4 ms·

I'm sure it is already a high priority, but it is a system built by humans, and it will always have mistakes. What if they were being forced to pay out 82 milli

I'm sure it is already a high priority, but it is a system built by humans, and it will always have mistakes. What if they were being forced to pay out 82 million instead of thousand? What about 82 billion? There should be clear cut laws surrounding clear errors, like there are in most places, and ones like this should not be forced to pay out.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
When SCADA software fucks up and runs a ship aground someone has to pay. When something breaks because some engineer relied too much on FEAs and didn't do any destructive tests someone has to pay. "Whoops, our bad" is not an acceptable excuse except in tech.
- tomtheelder 8y ago
  "Whoops, our bad" is actually a valid excuse in virtually every industry, as long as your mistake doesn't cause damage that needs to be repaired. Such damage is the only reason anyone has to pay in the situations you described. This situation is much more comparable to, say, ordering something from a store that turns out to be out of stock. The store has to refund you for the sale, of course, but that's all they are on the hook for. They aren't punished beyond that, they don't even have to go out and find the item for you.
ddingus 8y ago
Litigate it. That will be the answer.
TwitchySeal 8y ago
in this case the odds jumped from -600 to +75,000 ($12 profit to $82,000) What if they went to +75,000,000? Would they have to pay the guy $82,000,000? As long as the mistake was obvious, of course not.
turtlecloud 8y ago
Then thy go out of business and someone more competent should take their place. Otherwise there is no honor and incentive for them. Bookies have to live by their honor.
ddingus 8y ago
There are legal arguments that become valid at those amounts. There is a difference between: Ouch, that stung! Must do better. That amount kills the business! They own my whole enterprise now? This is a sting. Quality control tax. They should pay up, suck it up, maximize good will, and prevent it from happening again. Given this gaffe, it is even odds they have pocketed more than this amount from errors going the other way.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

When SCADA software fucks up and runs a ship aground someone has to pay. When something breaks because some engineer relied too much on FEAs and didn't do any destructive tests someone has to pay. "Whoops, our bad" is not an acceptable excuse except in tech.

tomtheelder 8y ago
"Whoops, our bad" is actually a valid excuse in virtually every industry, as long as your mistake doesn't cause damage that needs to be repaired. Such damage is the only reason anyone has to pay in the situations you described. This situation is much more comparable to, say, ordering something from a store that turns out to be out of stock. The store has to refund you for the sale, of course, but that's all they are on the hook for. They aren't punished beyond that, they don't even have to go out and find the item for you.

ddingus 8y ago

Litigate it. That will be the answer.

TwitchySeal 8y ago

in this case the odds jumped from -600 to +75,000 ($12 profit to $82,000) What if they went to +75,000,000? Would they have to pay the guy $82,000,000? As long as the mistake was obvious, of course not.

turtlecloud 8y ago

Then thy go out of business and someone more competent should take their place. Otherwise there is no honor and incentive for them. Bookies have to live by their honor.

ddingus 8y ago

There are legal arguments that become valid at those amounts. There is a difference between: Ouch, that stung! Must do better. That amount kills the business! They own my whole enterprise now? This is a sting. Quality control tax. They should pay up, suck it up, maximize good will, and prevent it from happening again. Given this gaffe, it is even odds they have pocketed more than this amount from errors going the other way.