3 ms·
TBH this does sound exactly like something you'd expect to happen if you took some Javascript ninja used to moving fast and breaking things and asked them to bu
by rvense 7y ago
TBH this does sound exactly like something you'd expect to happen if you took some Javascript ninja used to moving fast and breaking things and asked them to build a car. But surely Uber has more sense than that...
- svrtknst 7y agoYes... surely.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoComing from the defense (go ahead, clutch your pearls, I won't be offended) industry I just can't understand why people ship things that fail into in potentially dangerous states on some known non-trivial fraction of inputs. If the purpose of the software were entertainment or some other low stakes thing I'd understand but software controlling things that can kill people or lose lots of money need to be able to handle unexpected inputs gracefully.
- Eric_WVGG 7y agoBecause the penalties and rewards don’t align.
- Majromax 7y ago> I just can't understand why people ship things that fail into in potentially dangerous states on some known non-trivial fraction of inputs Because that kind of safety-conscious culture needs to be deliberately enforced, from the top all the way down, by a system that takes a long view. If we're making an analogy to the defense industry, then building self-driving cars as a tech startup is closer to the Anarchist's Cookbook than Northrop Grumman.
- targonca 7y agoBecause you don't want to be the one whose team is lacking in agility on the next company all-hands meeting ;)
- peteradio 7y agoOr managers barking at sheepish recent grads/h1bs who don't know how to or can't push back. Does not seem like a very strong engineering culture.
- fortran77 7y agoWhat are you saying, that a Haskell or Rust elite programmer wouldn't have made this mistake!?
- nosianu 7y agoThe strong types in those languages would have prevented a reference to a "Person" object to be treated like a reference to an "Other" object... /s