2 ms·

Can we really say it wasn't the software that ultimately caused this when the software absolutely had bugs? If nothing else this puts into focus plenty of bure

Can we really say it wasn't the software that ultimately caused this when the software absolutely had bugs? If nothing else this puts into focus plenty of bureaucratic problems, but we wouldn't be here without the underlying buggy software that opened the door for bureaucracy to fail so badly.

maccard 3y ago
> Can we really say it wasn't the software that ultimately caused this when the software absolutely had bugs? Yes, because as the OP clearly stated, the problem wasn't the bugs. The problem was the bugs were noticed, flagged, discussed, _and systemically ignored_.
richeyryan 3y ago
Substitute software for standard accountancy practices or a filing system that led to lost files, giving the incorrect impression that postmasters were stealing, and the result would have been the same. The core issue is an organisiation that values avoiding blame at all costs over transparency and accountability.
brianmcc 3y ago
Yes we can. The levels of corrupt behaviour involved in this story, going right to the very top of Government, literally, absolutely transcend any "bugs happen" narrative.
- guilhas 3y ago
  Not to mention the possibility that the Post Office could remotely change the accounts without postmaster's knowledge, that is worse than ignored bugs
arp242 3y ago
In any organisation things will go wrong at times, for all sort of reasons: software bugs, human error, organisational dysfunction, malicious actors, whatever. Mistakes get made. And even if the original mistake was hugely egregious, it's usually not a huge problem if you actually deal with it well (barring things like medical errors, but even there, trying to cover up a mistake can cause more harm than the initial mistake, at least in some cases). For these kind of institutional problems most of the time it's really the response to the mistake that turns a mistake in to a huge catastrofuck.

maccard 3y ago

> Can we really say it wasn't the software that ultimately caused this when the software absolutely had bugs? Yes, because as the OP clearly stated, the problem wasn't the bugs. The problem was the bugs were noticed, flagged, discussed, _and systemically ignored_.

richeyryan 3y ago

Substitute software for standard accountancy practices or a filing system that led to lost files, giving the incorrect impression that postmasters were stealing, and the result would have been the same. The core issue is an organisiation that values avoiding blame at all costs over transparency and accountability.

brianmcc 3y ago

Yes we can. The levels of corrupt behaviour involved in this story, going right to the very top of Government, literally, absolutely transcend any "bugs happen" narrative.

guilhas 3y ago
Not to mention the possibility that the Post Office could remotely change the accounts without postmaster's knowledge, that is worse than ignored bugs

arp242 3y ago

In any organisation things will go wrong at times, for all sort of reasons: software bugs, human error, organisational dysfunction, malicious actors, whatever. Mistakes get made. And even if the original mistake was hugely egregious, it's usually not a huge problem if you actually deal with it well (barring things like medical errors, but even there, trying to cover up a mistake can cause more harm than the initial mistake, at least in some cases). For these kind of institutional problems most of the time it's really the response to the mistake that turns a mistake in to a huge catastrofuck.