4 ms·

You seem to have missed the message. I am saying that we should impose rules on ourselves so that we don't have rules imposed on us from above. Rules from abov

You seem to have missed the message. I am saying that we should impose rules on ourselves so that we don't have rules imposed on us from above. Rules from above and rules by us should be in different galaxies as far as how well they work.

from-nibly 2y ago
Who is going to set these rules we impose on ourselves?
- gavinhoward 2y ago
  Us, if we are smart. The things I linked to are ideas. Others will have ideas too. Let's come to a consensus about them.
  - tardy_one 2y ago
    Requiring crowdstrike or similar to be able to do business isn't a requirement from government, it is from exactly this industry consensus where business, insurance, etc, gets consulting advice on what best practices exist and should be required. We have to do precisely what we've done because it isn't working?
  - ThrowawayR2 2y ago
    Physicians were not smart. They had licensing and liability imposed on them after quacks killed too many people. Civil engineers were not smart. They had licensing and liability imposed on them after bridges fell, dams burst, buildings collapsed, killing many people. Software developers will not be smart either. They will cry about not wanting liability and make accusations of gatekeeping until something bad enough happens (Crowdstrike isn't it; not enough people died as a direct consequence) and licensing and liability is forced on developers. And, to echo sentiments voiced by other replies, the anti-government hyperbole is more kooky than persuasive.
    - gavinhoward 2y ago
      Thank you for your comment. I agree that software developers won't be smart. > And, to echo sentiments voiced by other replies, the anti-government hyperbole is more kooky than persuasive. I am serious about it, not hyberbolic, but I will plan to leave it out of future stuff about this.
timr 2y ago
I didn't miss the message. Who is "us", exactly? What does that look like, in practice, if not something like SOC2 or ISO 27000? I mean...maybe you're suggesting that Crowdstrike should have followed some as-yet-unknown standard for deploying software. But if so, it's the same problem -- we'll have butt-covering compliance checklists for software development now, applied thoughtlessly by consultants promising safe harbor. Turtles all the way down.

from-nibly 2y ago

Who is going to set these rules we impose on ourselves?

gavinhoward 2y ago
Us, if we are smart. The things I linked to are ideas. Others will have ideas too. Let's come to a consensus about them.
- tardy_one 2y ago
  Requiring crowdstrike or similar to be able to do business isn't a requirement from government, it is from exactly this industry consensus where business, insurance, etc, gets consulting advice on what best practices exist and should be required. We have to do precisely what we've done because it isn't working?
- ThrowawayR2 2y ago
  Physicians were not smart. They had licensing and liability imposed on them after quacks killed too many people. Civil engineers were not smart. They had licensing and liability imposed on them after bridges fell, dams burst, buildings collapsed, killing many people. Software developers will not be smart either. They will cry about not wanting liability and make accusations of gatekeeping until something bad enough happens (Crowdstrike isn't it; not enough people died as a direct consequence) and licensing and liability is forced on developers. And, to echo sentiments voiced by other replies, the anti-government hyperbole is more kooky than persuasive.
  - gavinhoward 2y ago
    Thank you for your comment. I agree that software developers won't be smart. > And, to echo sentiments voiced by other replies, the anti-government hyperbole is more kooky than persuasive. I am serious about it, not hyberbolic, but I will plan to leave it out of future stuff about this.

timr 2y ago

I didn't miss the message. Who is "us", exactly? What does that look like, in practice, if not something like SOC2 or ISO 27000? I mean...maybe you're suggesting that Crowdstrike should have followed some as-yet-unknown standard for deploying software. But if so, it's the same problem -- we'll have butt-covering compliance checklists for software development now, applied thoughtlessly by consultants promising safe harbor. Turtles all the way down.