4 ms·

Any purported expert who uses software without considering its security is simply negligent. I'm not sure why people are trying to spin this to avoid placing th

by cdmyrm 2y ago

Any purported expert who uses software without considering its security is simply negligent. I'm not sure why people are trying to spin this to avoid placing the blame on the negligent programmer(s).

misiek08 2y ago
Weak programmers do this to defend this group making crap software. I agree that defaults should be secure and maybe there should be request limit on admin, full access token - but then people will just create another token with full access and use it.
Eisenstein 2y ago
And if it is the programmer's fault, what can we do about it? People are trying to avoid finding a solution that isn't throwing their hands up in the air. We either need to solve the problem in a place that is effective with the situation as it is (the tools) or we need to solve the situation such that it has consequences for doing the wrong thing on the part of the developer. Which shall it be?
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  Since those are only 2 options, and there are many more options, I'll pick option 3: convince people to value and fund universal education more from preschool on, building a better foundation for engineers and other professions in the decades following. In addition to that, it'd be cool if the blameless postmortems were made public, so everyone could learn from them. As for the other 2 options of restricting freedom, and extremely blameful postmortems, I reject both.
  - Eisenstein 2y ago
    Yes, being held accountable for your decisions is a restriction on your freedom.
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
      I still choose the third option, because it is the better of the three, compared to restricting what functionality the software people write is allowed to have, and extremely blameful postmortems (which are bad).
      - Eisenstein 2y ago
        All restrictions are bad, and accountability is bad. Got it. I'm glad to have had this discussion with you; very thought provoking.
        ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        Again, I still choose the third option, because it is the better of the three, compared to restricting what functionality the software people write is allowed to have, and extremely blameful postmortems (which are bad). You seem really stuck on the first two options. Why does it matter, given that the third is the best? Do you still insist upon a false dichotomy?
        Eisenstein 2y ago
        It isn't exactly surprising that someone who is the beneficiary of a system which has no accountability is against the imposing of such, I was just hoping you had something better to offer back than 'I don't like it' and assertions that something is bad without ever explaining why. I have no idea why 'blameful postmortems' are bad because you never told me, you just say it is. Why should I change my mind in that case?
        ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        >I have no idea why 'blameful postmortems' are bad because you never told me Usually when you don't know something, you ask someone who knows. Since you sort-of asked here, I'll give you the answer: Blameless postmortems lead to fewer failures, which is ostensibly the goal here. So what do you get from your idea of blameful ones? Feeling good about punishing someone, even though you're increasing failures by doing so?

by cdmyrm 2y ago

Any purported expert who uses software without considering its security is simply negligent. I'm not sure why people are trying to spin this to avoid placing the blame on the negligent programmer(s).

misiek08 2y ago

Weak programmers do this to defend this group making crap software. I agree that defaults should be secure and maybe there should be request limit on admin, full access token - but then people will just create another token with full access and use it.

Eisenstein 2y ago

And if it is the programmer's fault, what can we do about it? People are trying to avoid finding a solution that isn't throwing their hands up in the air. We either need to solve the problem in a place that is effective with the situation as it is (the tools) or we need to solve the situation such that it has consequences for doing the wrong thing on the part of the developer. Which shall it be?

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
Since those are only 2 options, and there are many more options, I'll pick option 3: convince people to value and fund universal education more from preschool on, building a better foundation for engineers and other professions in the decades following. In addition to that, it'd be cool if the blameless postmortems were made public, so everyone could learn from them. As for the other 2 options of restricting freedom, and extremely blameful postmortems, I reject both.
- Eisenstein 2y ago
  Yes, being held accountable for your decisions is a restriction on your freedom.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    I still choose the third option, because it is the better of the three, compared to restricting what functionality the software people write is allowed to have, and extremely blameful postmortems (which are bad).
    - Eisenstein 2y ago
      All restrictions are bad, and accountability is bad. Got it. I'm glad to have had this discussion with you; very thought provoking.
      - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        Again, I still choose the third option, because it is the better of the three, compared to restricting what functionality the software people write is allowed to have, and extremely blameful postmortems (which are bad). You seem really stuck on the first two options. Why does it matter, given that the third is the best? Do you still insist upon a false dichotomy?
        Eisenstein 2y ago
        It isn't exactly surprising that someone who is the beneficiary of a system which has no accountability is against the imposing of such, I was just hoping you had something better to offer back than 'I don't like it' and assertions that something is bad without ever explaining why. I have no idea why 'blameful postmortems' are bad because you never told me, you just say it is. Why should I change my mind in that case?
        ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        >I have no idea why 'blameful postmortems' are bad because you never told me Usually when you don't know something, you ask someone who knows. Since you sort-of asked here, I'll give you the answer: Blameless postmortems lead to fewer failures, which is ostensibly the goal here. So what do you get from your idea of blameful ones? Feeling good about punishing someone, even though you're increasing failures by doing so?