4 ms·
No. What we need is something that is amazingly simple: * you, a programmer who coded something that caused company X to lose Y dollars because of a "mistake",
by notyourday 5y ago
No. What we need is something that is amazingly simple:
* you, a programmer who coded something that caused company X to lose Y dollars because of a "mistake", have to be on a hook for Y dollars.
* you, a manager who managed a project that caused a company X to lose Y dollars because of a "mistake" by your programmer, have to be on a hook for Y dollars.
* you, a product owner who accepted the what the manager of ta project that caused a company X to lose Y dollars because of a "mistake" by your programmer, have to be on a hook for Y dollars.
* you, the CEO of the company that had a product owner who accepted the what the manager of ta project that caused a company X to lose Y dollars because of a "mistake" by your programmer, have to be on a hook for Y dollars.
Yes, I understand that the cost of a mistake is now higher than the loss suffered by X. That's the incentive to ensure that it does not happen because the wives or husbands or partners of the people who would now have to pay are going to ensure that they do not do take that whose wacky ideas and implement them -- wacky ideas are abstract but the loss of nice housing, nice organic food, nice daycare for the kids and nice scholarship fun is real.
- selcuka 5y agoStart punishing mistakes and you will soon have a hard time finding good people to employ. Only bad (and broke) ones will be available.
- mrguyorama 5y agoFunny, we hold civil engineers accountable and there seem to be plenty of capable engineers to do things that need to be done, and we hold bad pilots accountable, and yet the only reason airlines have a pilot shortage is because they refuse to pay more than $20k a year. Developers need to stop being so allergic to accountability. It's kind of pathetic
- selcuka 5y agoI studied mechanical engineering myself, so I hear you. That being said, software development and civil engineering are very different in terms of risk management. There are strict regulations around what you do and if you play by the rules, you have minimum to no risk. Even if dozens of people die under a collapsing building you are not accountable if everything you had done was by the book. Software development, on the other hand, is more like wild west. There are minimal regulations, only best practices. One developer can never know if the end product is free of any errors. Pilots are a completely different story. The OP was talking about "causing company X to lose Y dollars", not human lives.
- notyourday 5y ago> Start punishing mistakes and you will soon have a hard time finding good people to employ. Only bad (and broke) ones will be available. Nah, the opposite. Being paid $800k/year is a great carrot. It should come with a stick so fewer people do the cruise control.
- bjorn2k 5y agoI hope this is a joke.
- hutzlibu 5y agoSince you like to invoke a climate of fear, why not add the death sentence to that list? But ... would you then like to work in that area, if you fear every step you make, can be your last? Do you think there would be much innovation, if the punishment costs are so out of balance?
- bigbillheck 5y agoYou forgot the board and the shareholders.
- mewpmewp2 5y agoWhat about the customers who bought/consumed that faulty product? They should also pay Y dollars, since it was their decision and responsibility to take the risk of buying the product and not vetting management, developers and the CEO before hand.
- raxxorrax 5y agoSome companies actually try to do that. They are mostly not the best ones, have liquidity problems and incompetent management. You would have to pay CEO salaries since the responsibility lies on developers.