3 ms·

> No, I'm assuming that the software engineers had sufficient information to know what the gaps in their knowledge might be. ... if the engineers were told by t

> No, I'm assuming that the software engineers had sufficient information to know what the gaps in their knowledge might be. ... if the engineers were told by the manufacturer that an error in the sensor would result in no data rather than bad data, there should immediately be followup questions ... Yes, of course there should be due diligence with any hand-off. However, lets assume for the sake of argument that there was, and the engineers using the sensor data received appropriate answers to their questions, and yet still the sensor did not perform as specified. It's hard to blame someone who did their due diligence, did everything right, and relied on ultimately inaccurate information.

evilotto 8y ago
My point (poorly made) is that there is a difference between blame and responsibility. "Blame" is answering the question "who screwed up"; "responsibility" is answering the question "who is going to make this better". The original tweet-stream post was making the argument that the software (and so naturally the software people) did nothing wrong and thus was not to blame, but also made the argument that since everything else was wrong ("not my fault!") that there was nothing the software people could have done to make it better, i.e., they have no responsibility.