3 ms·

> I don't think it's out of the question to expect professionalism at 150k. These are VC funded companies, not a couple of college kids scraping together a prot

> I don't think it's out of the question to expect professionalism at 150k. These are VC funded companies, not a couple of college kids scraping together a prototype. You can expect whatever you want, just prepare to be disappointed. We have absolutely learned by now that unless there very real consequences for doing or not doing something, you will regularly see the worst possible thing happen. This is why licenses exist and legal 'sign-offs' exist. There needs to be a licensing organization that can revoke people's ability to get certificates or to even be employed working on certain aspects of software if we ever want to solve this problem. I mean, you even need a license to cut hair in many states.

999900000999 2y ago
Your solution is to regulate software instead of calling out bad actors? What a dystopian future, curl without a permit? Why are you blaming the rank and file employees. The buck stops with the employer. If anything fine the companies
- Eisenstein 2y ago
  Asking people to be responsible for the damage they cause is called 'accountability' and not 'dystopia'. Software is not just something someone uses for hobbies or for word processing or whatever. A bad design decision in some critical software can have just as much of an impact as a bad design decision in a bridge or an airplane. If we want to be called 'engineers' then we need to put more on the line than just a public apology when something goes wrong due to a decision someone actively made to save money or reduce the work involved. And of course it should involve the people who make those decisions and not just the grunt who implemented them. But if the 'grunts' had the power to say 'no, I will not do this because it is insecure and my license is on the line' then that's a good thing. No?
  - 999900000999 2y ago
    >But if the 'grunts' had the power to say 'no, I will not do this because it is insecure and my license is on the line' then that's a good thing. No? This will never work in a global economy. If you outsource the software you're just begging companies to find someone making 15$ the fall guy. Sounds pretty bad. Your manager tells you to do something stupid or your fired. You do so, and when it fails they blame you and your software engineering license is revoked. You can't find a job and now get to live in a homeless shelter. Meaningful fines for companies is the only way to fix this. Maybe... For some sensitive things like location data an expensive permit should be required. But this needs to be a corporate responsibility, not an individual one. In your scenario bad companies are going to ruin the lives of their employees by making them risk their licenses.
    - Eisenstein 2y ago
      How do engineers manage it then? What about banks? Any regulated industry? It obviously works for some professions, why is software the exception?
      - 999900000999 2y ago
        Why do you want to regulate software? Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. You can check a setting in OSX to make it so. Who decides what software to regulate. Do I need a permit to install Python ?
        Eisenstein 2y ago
        > Why do you want to regulate software? I don't want to regulate software. I want people to have something to lose if they make a decision that has a large impact. > Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. I don't understand this point. > Who decides what software to regulate. Who decides any laws or regulations? > Do I need a permit to install Python ? Does you installing Python have potential consequences for large numbers of people or could it cause a significant amount of harm? Why do you take the most extreme possible position and apply it to me? Is it that difficult to argue against a sensible one?
        999900000999 2y ago
        > Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. I don't understand this point. The core of this issue is an insecure updating mechanism for desktop apps. You can argue for security sake, users may opt to only use the official Apple app store or the official Microsoft store. In this case instead of having a random startup manage the update process, you have a couple of multibillion dollar companies. I'm trying to figure out what exactly you want to happen here. Would you essentially make it a legal to distribute software without a permit ? Would distributing certain software require a permit ?
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    > A bad design decision in some critical software can have just as much of an impact as a bad design decision in a bridge or an airplane. This is a better point than you realize. Blameless postmortems in IT are largely inspired by blameless postmortems from aerospace failures.
    - Eisenstein 2y ago
      If aerospace gets away with it then we should fix that as well.
      - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        On the contrary: blameless postmortems are better.

999900000999 2y ago

Your solution is to regulate software instead of calling out bad actors? What a dystopian future, curl without a permit? Why are you blaming the rank and file employees. The buck stops with the employer. If anything fine the companies

Eisenstein 2y ago
Asking people to be responsible for the damage they cause is called 'accountability' and not 'dystopia'. Software is not just something someone uses for hobbies or for word processing or whatever. A bad design decision in some critical software can have just as much of an impact as a bad design decision in a bridge or an airplane. If we want to be called 'engineers' then we need to put more on the line than just a public apology when something goes wrong due to a decision someone actively made to save money or reduce the work involved. And of course it should involve the people who make those decisions and not just the grunt who implemented them. But if the 'grunts' had the power to say 'no, I will not do this because it is insecure and my license is on the line' then that's a good thing. No?
- 999900000999 2y ago
  >But if the 'grunts' had the power to say 'no, I will not do this because it is insecure and my license is on the line' then that's a good thing. No? This will never work in a global economy. If you outsource the software you're just begging companies to find someone making 15$ the fall guy. Sounds pretty bad. Your manager tells you to do something stupid or your fired. You do so, and when it fails they blame you and your software engineering license is revoked. You can't find a job and now get to live in a homeless shelter. Meaningful fines for companies is the only way to fix this. Maybe... For some sensitive things like location data an expensive permit should be required. But this needs to be a corporate responsibility, not an individual one. In your scenario bad companies are going to ruin the lives of their employees by making them risk their licenses.
  - Eisenstein 2y ago
    How do engineers manage it then? What about banks? Any regulated industry? It obviously works for some professions, why is software the exception?
    - 999900000999 2y ago
      Why do you want to regulate software? Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. You can check a setting in OSX to make it so. Who decides what software to regulate. Do I need a permit to install Python ?
      - Eisenstein 2y ago
        > Why do you want to regulate software? I don't want to regulate software. I want people to have something to lose if they make a decision that has a large impact. > Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. I don't understand this point. > Who decides what software to regulate. Who decides any laws or regulations? > Do I need a permit to install Python ? Does you installing Python have potential consequences for large numbers of people or could it cause a significant amount of harm? Why do you take the most extreme possible position and apply it to me? Is it that difficult to argue against a sensible one?
        999900000999 2y ago
        > Arguably this whole thing wouldn't happen if these apps were distributed and updated via the OSX app store. If that's the future you want, it's largely already here. I don't understand this point. The core of this issue is an insecure updating mechanism for desktop apps. You can argue for security sake, users may opt to only use the official Apple app store or the official Microsoft store. In this case instead of having a random startup manage the update process, you have a couple of multibillion dollar companies. I'm trying to figure out what exactly you want to happen here. Would you essentially make it a legal to distribute software without a permit ? Would distributing certain software require a permit ?
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  > A bad design decision in some critical software can have just as much of an impact as a bad design decision in a bridge or an airplane. This is a better point than you realize. Blameless postmortems in IT are largely inspired by blameless postmortems from aerospace failures.
  - Eisenstein 2y ago
    If aerospace gets away with it then we should fix that as well.
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
      On the contrary: blameless postmortems are better.