3 ms·

Aren't all bugs effectively a human error at some level? In this case, the human wrote bad PHP. I hope Tumblr will keep us more in the loop on this than when t

Aren't all bugs effectively a human error at some level? In this case, the human wrote bad PHP. I hope Tumblr will keep us more in the loop on this than when they were down for 24+ hours.

knowtheory 16y ago
no? Bugs can arise when a system or code base is being used in a manner that was not originally envisioned by its author. That's not a bug, that's something more akin to failure due to scope creep.
- j2d2j2d2 16y ago
  I fail to see how that isn't also a human error?
  - ejames 16y ago
    Yes, but it's a different and more serious kind of human error. "Someone made a typo" is one kind of human error. It's common and easily corrected. "We are running our servers such that someone can ruin everything by making a typo, and we won't catch it until it's too late" is a different, more serious and less easily-corrected error. But yes, all bugs are human error.
    - ramidarigaz 16y ago
      Well, excepting cosmic ray bit-flipping and the like.
      - whatusername 16y ago
        And sometimes it's just a bug. http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h96000/h96566k.jpg http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h96000/h96566k.jpg
    - Cococabasa 16y ago
      No, all bugs are not human error. Some bugs are caused because the programmer cannot see into the future and determine that something they programmed will be used in a manner that was not intended (using a Hammer function instead of the new Screwdriver function). So the bug is in the code that the programmer wrote years ago. It is not suitable for today and WOULD crash and create a bug if used that way. But is there an error somewhere? No, the programmer just cannot see into the future.
      - dablya 16y ago
        Whoever writes the code that makes it possible for the Hammer to be used when Screwdriver is called for during execution is introducing a bug into the codebase... It's a bug caused by a human, not necessarily the same one that created the Hammer.
      - ejames 16y ago
        Ah, but that is human error - the error of the person who used a program in a manner for which it was not intended! They erred in not understanding that the program was written years ago and not intended for that use. Of course, then it is not the error of the human who wrote the program. This, however, is the reason why the phrase "human error" is mainly applied to simple, 'random' mistakes such as typos, fat-fingering a button, or misfiling a paper - errors that anyone can make, simply by being a forgetful human - rather than the literal meaning of "any error committed by a human". Stretched to cover every mistake made by a homo sapiens, the phrase loses all descriptive power. So, to clarify - all errors made by humans are "human error" in some sense, but that renders the classification meaningless, so we should distinguish between simple, common errors and more worrisome ones by using words other than "human error". Your example of a programmer that did not foresee a future desired use could be referred to as a "requirements error" if the programmer reasonably could have or should have foreseen it, as "operator error" if the person using the program is meant to be trained to understand its proper uses, or a "misallocation of resources error" if the problem exists because not enough budget or time was assigned to keep the program aligned with current necessary uses. I sometimes feel that a fair number of disagreements or disputes in the comments of Hacker News are best resolved by checking whether we are using words in exactly the best way.
  - knowtheory 16y ago
    It's human error, but it's not a bug. There's no mistake being made by a human due to faulty thinking or execution. You can have a good faith misunderstanding about what an author's intention, especially if your tool does what you want, and it's author decides the lib is headed in a different direction during the next update. Not your fault, not the author's fault, just two different intents.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

Aren't all bugs effectively a human error at some level? In this case, the human wrote bad PHP. I hope Tumblr will keep us more in the loop on this than when they were down for 24+ hours.

knowtheory 16y ago

no? Bugs can arise when a system or code base is being used in a manner that was not originally envisioned by its author. That's not a bug, that's something more akin to failure due to scope creep.

j2d2j2d2 16y ago
I fail to see how that isn't also a human error?
- ejames 16y ago
  Yes, but it's a different and more serious kind of human error. "Someone made a typo" is one kind of human error. It's common and easily corrected. "We are running our servers such that someone can ruin everything by making a typo, and we won't catch it until it's too late" is a different, more serious and less easily-corrected error. But yes, all bugs are human error.
  - ramidarigaz 16y ago
    Well, excepting cosmic ray bit-flipping and the like.
    - whatusername 16y ago
      And sometimes it's just a bug. http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h96000/h96566k.jpg http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h96000/h96566k.jpg
  - Cococabasa 16y ago
    No, all bugs are not human error. Some bugs are caused because the programmer cannot see into the future and determine that something they programmed will be used in a manner that was not intended (using a Hammer function instead of the new Screwdriver function). So the bug is in the code that the programmer wrote years ago. It is not suitable for today and WOULD crash and create a bug if used that way. But is there an error somewhere? No, the programmer just cannot see into the future.
    - dablya 16y ago
      Whoever writes the code that makes it possible for the Hammer to be used when Screwdriver is called for during execution is introducing a bug into the codebase... It's a bug caused by a human, not necessarily the same one that created the Hammer.
    - ejames 16y ago
      Ah, but that is human error - the error of the person who used a program in a manner for which it was not intended! They erred in not understanding that the program was written years ago and not intended for that use. Of course, then it is not the error of the human who wrote the program. This, however, is the reason why the phrase "human error" is mainly applied to simple, 'random' mistakes such as typos, fat-fingering a button, or misfiling a paper - errors that anyone can make, simply by being a forgetful human - rather than the literal meaning of "any error committed by a human". Stretched to cover every mistake made by a homo sapiens, the phrase loses all descriptive power. So, to clarify - all errors made by humans are "human error" in some sense, but that renders the classification meaningless, so we should distinguish between simple, common errors and more worrisome ones by using words other than "human error". Your example of a programmer that did not foresee a future desired use could be referred to as a "requirements error" if the programmer reasonably could have or should have foreseen it, as "operator error" if the person using the program is meant to be trained to understand its proper uses, or a "misallocation of resources error" if the problem exists because not enough budget or time was assigned to keep the program aligned with current necessary uses. I sometimes feel that a fair number of disagreements or disputes in the comments of Hacker News are best resolved by checking whether we are using words in exactly the best way.
- knowtheory 16y ago
  It's human error, but it's not a bug. There's no mistake being made by a human due to faulty thinking or execution. You can have a good faith misunderstanding about what an author's intention, especially if your tool does what you want, and it's author decides the lib is headed in a different direction during the next update. Not your fault, not the author's fault, just two different intents.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]