>, so we practiced writing bug-free code. After two years of practicing, and after my previous two years of log-keeping, I was able to write substantial program

>, so we practiced writing bug-free code. After two years of practicing, and after my previous two years of log-keeping, I was able to write substantial programs (thousands of lines) and run them without compile or run-time errors on the first try. [...] the exercise convinced me that bugs don’t creep into our code by themselves. We put them there, and we can decide to not put them there. One logic flaw in that self-reported assessment is that us readers don't really know if his 1000-line programs were truly proven to be bug free. But we can still set that aside and entertain the idea that just deciding to not write bugs actually prevents bugs. Consider various disciplines: - programming: Some search/sort code that had a hidden bug for 20+ years. Both computer experts Jon Bentley at Carnegie Mellon Uni and Joshua Bloch (Java expert) created the same bug: https://ai.googleblog.com/2006/06/extra-extra-read-all-about-it-nearly.html https://ai.googleblog.com/2006/06/extra-extra-read-all-about... - mathematics: Andrew Wiles 1st attempt at proving Fermat's Last Theorem had a flaw that was discovered by his peer reviewers. And the authors for a SAT math exam unwittingly wrote a bug: https://youtu.be/kN3AOMrnEUs?t=2m05s https://youtu.be/kN3AOMrnEUs?t=2m05s - laws : legislators write laws with attempts at precise wording but it still has unintended loopholes or perverse incentives they never foresaw Did all those people "decide to write bugs" therefore they can decide not to? Of course not. You can reduce bugs by following some best practices (e.g. use well-tested encryption library instead of rolling your own, etc) but bugs will still happen no matter how much you "decide" against it. Put another way, conscientious people have already decided to not write bugs but since we don't know how to achieve that objective, it doesn't solve the issue.