3 ms·

Some people have designed some systems that include that assumption in some places - they almost certainly don't believe that names are unique, but still act li

Some people have designed some systems that include that assumption in some places - they almost certainly don't believe that names are unique, but still act like they do. For example, I have seen a (non-online) process designed in a manner that allow anyone with a matching name to easily and even accidentally gain access to the other persons' goods - e.g. you come to fetch your order, show ID that you're "John Smith", and get given all the currently outstanding stuff that's ordered by a John Smith, because the system is designed so that the employee searches by name, and the system provides a list of all the items that should be handed out without sufficient information to verify anything else.

mjevans 6y ago
That system more strongly depends on the (3 + 0.5) 4th dimensional interaction and people generally being honest enough; as well as the hopefully implicit secret of who's orders are in the system. Though with all the food delivery stuff these days, it wouldn't surprise me for some rando to walk in, grab a reasonable looking number of bags from the output rack, and just walk right out the door. Particularly if they've got the confidence to not look guilty while doing it.
- PeterisP 6y ago
  The impact scenario was that a person with a common name comes for their order, gets given a bag/box with stuff, and that box contains both their items and the items from someone else with the same name - i.e. the process (and the supporting IT system) simply couldn't organize separate pickups for two different John Smiths on the same day.
  - mjevans 6y ago
    That's just a poorly designed system. The proper natural key is an order number (possibly an alias to an internal ID that isn't shared, like a GUID). The failure mode without blame might be a pickup which contains both orders, in distinct bags. I think most places staple a receipt to the outside of the bag, so that should make this even less likely.

mjevans 6y ago

That system more strongly depends on the (3 + 0.5) 4th dimensional interaction and people generally being honest enough; as well as the hopefully implicit secret of who's orders are in the system. Though with all the food delivery stuff these days, it wouldn't surprise me for some rando to walk in, grab a reasonable looking number of bags from the output rack, and just walk right out the door. Particularly if they've got the confidence to not look guilty while doing it.

PeterisP 6y ago
The impact scenario was that a person with a common name comes for their order, gets given a bag/box with stuff, and that box contains both their items and the items from someone else with the same name - i.e. the process (and the supporting IT system) simply couldn't organize separate pickups for two different John Smiths on the same day.
- mjevans 6y ago
  That's just a poorly designed system. The proper natural key is an order number (possibly an alias to an internal ID that isn't shared, like a GUID). The failure mode without blame might be a pickup which contains both orders, in distinct bags. I think most places staple a receipt to the outside of the bag, so that should make this even less likely.