3 ms·
I understand that CS doesn't draw much sympathies even before this happened - from myself included - and it is easy to pin point systemic issues to a single fai
by 627467 2y ago
I understand that CS doesn't draw much sympathies even before this happened - from myself included - and it is easy to pin point systemic issues to a single failure point and make it liable and financially responsible for all downstream failures.
But this only creates excuses for all other responsible players in this systemic issue - or society at large. Just to pick 1 example: I keep reading comments on how profoundly health care providers were affected and that lead to human life losses.
I understand that having "tech" involved in health or any sector is important but are we really wanting to build critical services that grind to halt or have huge efficiency impact when a single vendor fails? Are these service providers not responsible for thinking about failure modes?
- HappySweeney 2y agoI read that healthcare was mollified by a facility whereby they could choose when and which updates to allow, which CS intentionally bypassed with this latest update. This was during the chaotic day-of though, so possibly false.
- account42 2y agoThere can always be lingering bugs that trigger at a certain time on all systems or for certain input data so the only way to have redundancy is to have actually heterogenous systems.
- adrianN 2y agoIn the end it's a matter of cost. Having two independent supply chains for anything as complex as healthcare infrastructure is essentially unaffordable.