4 ms·
I would love to know what the bug was, sadly we'll probably never know. I imagine the engineer responsible for `NEVER 349` made a mistake that ended up flipping
by fredley 6y ago
I would love to know what the bug was, sadly we'll probably never know. I imagine the engineer responsible for `NEVER 349` made a mistake that ended up flipping a single bit, to the `ALWAYS 349` position...
- IceWreck 6y ago800,000 bottles ? This mightve been intentional
- ddalex 6y agoa Coca-Cola operative infiltrated in the factory took care of it
- slim 6y agomy guess : they setup a machine that prints the successive numbers inside the bottle caps and there is no way to skip a number, they had to remove them afterwards.. someone simply forgot to do that.
- mkl 6y agoMaking 800,000 extra bottle caps and removing them later seems like a plan that wouldn't have left the drawing board. Especially with the risk of fraud from these particular caps.
- jjk166 6y agoWouldn't surprise me if they had a little piston or something to push off every Xth bottle but there was an off-by-one error so they wound up pushing off every bottle with 348 printed instead, or perhaps they had to restart the line once and no one told the engineer to adjust for it so the place was off after that.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y agoIt sounds like the bottling factory printing all the other numbers simply missed the memo on not printing 349.
- duxup 6y agoSo many possibles. Complete speculation / personal bias theory: I'm going to go with human process error such as the instructions weren't communicated to the right people at the bottling companies and never reached the person who would enter `NEVER 349`. Classic case of someone communicating a thing and assuming "everyone reads my memos / should do what I say" and not recognizing the complexity of such communication or that maybe there's a proper process to follow. I run into that a lot.