3 ms·
> Who is ever certain? How certain are you? How willing to endure false claims are you, even if miraculously you have convinced yourself the work is flawless?
by lijok 3y ago
> Who is ever certain? How certain are you? How willing to endure false claims are you, even if miraculously you have convinced yourself the work is flawless?
If you're not certain and unwilling to fight false claims, just don't publish it for public use. It's kind of that simple.
> We think together with open source. Ideas are shared. The world iterates forward & we learn & improve, together
Indeed. And we have, and continue to produce plenty of resources for that.
> This is insulting beyond words
My sincere apologies that I insulted you by stating you shouldn't be allowed to hand out home-made fire extinguishers to the public and expect no repercussions
- jauntywundrkind 3y agoI have the hardest time imaging what it would take to develop software we are certain of. Developers of greatest talent are experts at finding doubts and potential weaknesses. They see accrued depth of complexity far beyond what the minds of simpler beings floating only on the surface of interface see. They can imagine all kinds of complex interactions. And they are never certain. That doubt is a doubt they work against, guard against ad best they can, but live with. It feels like such a ridiculous silly alien voice, such absurd naivety, to say, oh, just be certain. Just make it flawless. Whatever happens, it must be perfect. It's a juvenile fantasy, that only one ignorant to the complex nature of reality, unthinking of the combinatorial explosions of possibilities that happen as layers of systems & libraries intersect, unseeing of the absurd misuse by users of technology, that any and all difficulties could be conquered by just demanding someone making something make it perfect or never ever share it with the world, never allow users.
- lijok 3y agoYou're thinking in absolute terms. I think that might be the source of the disagreement. I am not advocating that it should be illegal to publish OSS unless you can mathematically prove it is faultless. I am advocating that if you are going to publish software for public consumption you better be damn sure it wont cause harm, because you will be (should be) accountable for any harm caused.
- whatisyour 3y agoWould manufacturer of knives be liable for knife attacks? The world runs on limited liability.
- lijok 3y agoNo, as in that scenario the knife is not being used for its intended purpose
- orangecat 3y agoThis would eliminate the vast majority of non-monetized open source, because authors would be exposing themselves to unbounded liability with no upside. I'd have to take down all my apps and repos even though as far as I know they have never caused any harm. Maybe you consider that an acceptable tradeoff; I don't.