2 ms·
No, I'm saying change that even its supporters concede will kill people is bad if we can't actually quantify either its benefits or its cost in human life. You
by slg 1y ago
No, I'm saying change that even its supporters concede will kill people is bad if we can't actually quantify either its benefits or its cost in human life. You talked about a "tradeoff" while having no idea what is being traded for what. That is advocating for change just for the sake of change. Opposing that is not advocating against all change, it is saying "move fast and break things" is an immoral approach when dealing with human lives.
- edanm 1y agoYour original comment argued there is no value add. I gave an example of the kind of value add that you can get (saving money/time on following up something wrong). I did not advocate for this specific release being better, and I certainly did not say we should "move fast and break things". I don't know who you think you're arguing against but it's not me. I only pushed back on the specific idea that this there is no possible value-add by this kind of software.
- slg 1y agoWhen you can't actually quantify the savings in time or the cost in life, you have no idea if this is adding value or not. I could just as easily flip a coin to decide whether to see a doctor, do you think that automatically "adds value" because the coin occasionally gives me the right answer regardless of how often it gives me the right answer?