4 ms·

> Let him who is without sin cast the first stone So you're telling me that you've reviewed every line of every library you've ever used?

• washadjeffmad 4y ago
  Engineers don't assess every molecule of the materials they construct bridges out of. Doesn't mean they're not accountable when one collapses. Also, your saying doesn't mention anything about people who point out to others who should be stoned. I'm assuming that's okay, as well as letting people know what they did that would deserve a stoning. Just in general, not advocating anyone be stoned.
  • S201 4y ago
    > Engineers don't assess every molecule of the materials they construct bridges out of. Doesn't mean they're not accountable when one collapses. If it's something completely unpredictable then, no, they're not generally liable. It's called an "act of god" and you'll find that language in virtually every contract. > Also, your saying doesn't mention anything about people who point out to others who should be stoned. I'm assuming that's okay, as well as letting people know what they did that would deserve a stoning. Just in general, not advocating anyone be stoned. I have absolutely no idea what your point is here.
    • washadjeffmad 4y ago
      It would take a software engineer to have the ego to imply that a bug in their code was "act of god" :) Parent wasn't lobbing stones, just pointing out that we are responsible, if not culpable, for the results of the development decisions we approve and commit. A library was used that wasn't fully reviewed, vetted, or corrected prior to use. It's like buying rivets and not inspecting them before you build a skyscraper with them - even if nothing comes of it, was no wrong done?
  • namaria 4y ago
    Airplanes most definitely have thoroughly audited and certified code used in the onboard systems.
• bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
  No, but I wouldn't blame the code I used. You need to vet your own deps, especially when creating a product as big as chat GPT.