2 ms·

The difference is that if your nuclear reactor failed to account for a particular type of disaster that never actually materialized, we would not talk about how

The difference is that if your nuclear reactor failed to account for a particular type of disaster that never actually materialized, we would not talk about how you are responsible for radiation poisoning the entire population and charge you accordingly. If the vulnerability in your ruby gem was found and fixed before any reports of actual attacks, and no reports of attacks ever came out, we would not claim that you are responsible for some arbitrary number of businesses getting owned.

mpyne 14y ago
Would we still blame a company for leaking 6.5 million hashed passwords if the hackers decided for whatever strange reason not to take advantage of it? Would we blame someone for putting arsenic in their spouse's meal if the spouse coincidentally passed up dinner that night? Would we blame someone who killed a family of 5 by driving drunk on the road even though he or she is way too impaired to think straight? Whatever else I believe, I believe people are responsible for their own actions. If I mess up and things still don't go screwy it's luck, not a positive reflection on me.
- lawnchair_larry 14y ago
  Blame them for what? That is key to this point. > Would we still blame a company for leaking 6.5 million hashed passwords if the hackers decided for whatever strange reason not to take advantage of it? I'd blame them for negligence. I would not blame them for the hacks that "strangely" never took place. > Would we blame someone for putting arsenic in their spouse's meal if the spouse coincidentally passed up dinner that night? I'd blame them for attempted murder, and this analogy has nothing to do with anything. > Would we blame someone who killed a family of 5 by driving drunk on the road even though he or she is way too impaired to think straight? Blame them for killing someone they actually killed? Sure, no brainer. The analogies are getting ridiculous, as analogies always do, so let's both avoid those. What I wouldn't do is blame someone for the death of many people when no one actually died. Analogies be damned, this just makes no sense to do.

mpyne 14y ago

Would we still blame a company for leaking 6.5 million hashed passwords if the hackers decided for whatever strange reason not to take advantage of it? Would we blame someone for putting arsenic in their spouse's meal if the spouse coincidentally passed up dinner that night? Would we blame someone who killed a family of 5 by driving drunk on the road even though he or she is way too impaired to think straight? Whatever else I believe, I believe people are responsible for their own actions. If I mess up and things still don't go screwy it's luck, not a positive reflection on me.

lawnchair_larry 14y ago
Blame them for what? That is key to this point. > Would we still blame a company for leaking 6.5 million hashed passwords if the hackers decided for whatever strange reason not to take advantage of it? I'd blame them for negligence. I would not blame them for the hacks that "strangely" never took place. > Would we blame someone for putting arsenic in their spouse's meal if the spouse coincidentally passed up dinner that night? I'd blame them for attempted murder, and this analogy has nothing to do with anything. > Would we blame someone who killed a family of 5 by driving drunk on the road even though he or she is way too impaired to think straight? Blame them for killing someone they actually killed? Sure, no brainer. The analogies are getting ridiculous, as analogies always do, so let's both avoid those. What I wouldn't do is blame someone for the death of many people when no one actually died. Analogies be damned, this just makes no sense to do.