4 ms·

There is no such thing as lack of risk in this world. When a restaurant takes your reservation for Friday night, there's a 0.00001% (or so) risk that they will

There is no such thing as lack of risk in this world. When a restaurant takes your reservation for Friday night, there's a 0.00001% (or so) risk that they will burn down on Thursday or that half the staff will get heart attacks or something. Should they not do reservations at all?

xnyan 6y ago
If they don't have a working smoke alarm, or are storing flammable materials over the burner, or don't have enough emergency exits then no, they should not do reservations at all. It seems Canon did not have a backup, they had replication of data. If you are storing data for money, then this is a professionally negligent behavior. Not being able to prepare for everything is not an valid excuse to not prepare for what you reasonably can.
- CydeWeys 6y ago
  What does adherence to fire code have anything to do with taking reservations? Also, reservations are free. It's not reasonable to expect restaurants to do anything and everything to honor 100% of reservations when many customers never show up for them and don't have any skin in the game anyway. Whatever point is trying to be made here is going out the window thanks to the "zero 9" nature of restaurant reservations. (Yes, not even 90% of restaurant reservations end up turning into actual paying tables.)
  - jiofih 6y ago
    Indeed, it has nothing to do with taking reservations, but providing service which is the crux of the issue. If they accept customers while knowingly not following fire regulations, then yes, it’s wrong and unethical; similar thinking should apply to software services.
codeisawesome 6y ago
Losing a restaurant reservation on a single night when surrounded by alternatives (aka - lots of backup plans) is not the same as losing data that people trust as the backup plan for their data - the loss of which causes a lot more harm. Especially if it’s a respected brand.
- hinkley 6y ago
  “I lost your reservations” is so much less serious than “I lost the pictures of grandma’s birthday”

xnyan 6y ago

If they don't have a working smoke alarm, or are storing flammable materials over the burner, or don't have enough emergency exits then no, they should not do reservations at all. It seems Canon did not have a backup, they had replication of data. If you are storing data for money, then this is a professionally negligent behavior. Not being able to prepare for everything is not an valid excuse to not prepare for what you reasonably can.

CydeWeys 6y ago
What does adherence to fire code have anything to do with taking reservations? Also, reservations are free. It's not reasonable to expect restaurants to do anything and everything to honor 100% of reservations when many customers never show up for them and don't have any skin in the game anyway. Whatever point is trying to be made here is going out the window thanks to the "zero 9" nature of restaurant reservations. (Yes, not even 90% of restaurant reservations end up turning into actual paying tables.)
- jiofih 6y ago
  Indeed, it has nothing to do with taking reservations, but providing service which is the crux of the issue. If they accept customers while knowingly not following fire regulations, then yes, it’s wrong and unethical; similar thinking should apply to software services.

codeisawesome 6y ago

Losing a restaurant reservation on a single night when surrounded by alternatives (aka - lots of backup plans) is not the same as losing data that people trust as the backup plan for their data - the loss of which causes a lot more harm. Especially if it’s a respected brand.

hinkley 6y ago
“I lost your reservations” is so much less serious than “I lost the pictures of grandma’s birthday”