4 ms·

Until that bug causes a car to drive unexpectedly into a wall in the interim time until you've sent out a patch. The importance of being bug-free is much more d

Until that bug causes a car to drive unexpectedly into a wall in the interim time until you've sent out a patch. The importance of being bug-free is much more driven by the potential damage caused by a bug than how quickly you can update the software.

GenerocUsername 13y ago
Fear monger. What if what if what if... I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I'm just saying that possible new issues are no reason to persist the old issues
- throwaway2048 13y ago
  This is utter nonsense, "possible new issues" are every reason to carefully evaluate and weight new options.
- sukuriant 13y ago
  No. It's a car, and has the power to kill people on software malfunction, making it a critical system. Critical systems are tend to go through a much greater and more robust form of testing.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    The destructive potential of a car exceeds that of a lot of handguns one can buy. There have long been techniques for writing software as formal proofs of correctness. As far as I can tell, they haven't been popular with mainstream programmers because they are simply too different.
    - sukuriant 13y ago
      That is a really neat bit of fact; but, what does that have to do with what I was talking about? I really would like to know, it sounds like a really important insight, I'm just not sure what train of thought led to that.
- Fomite 13y ago
  No, but "Cars do uncomfortable things at high velocity" is not exactly an edge case.
sliverstorm 13y ago
Right. So, what happens when you are the one in that car, the car that teaches them better?
zobzu 13y ago
do you think that the gasoline cars don't have software updates? their engine is nowadays all software controlled and theres a fw update plug, generally under your driving wheel. and they'll update it when they service the car. how is that software any safer than the OTA? its not.
- npizzolato 13y ago
  I never said that. I was responding to "The easier it is to update software, the less important that it is bug-free."

GenerocUsername 13y ago

Fear monger. What if what if what if... I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I'm just saying that possible new issues are no reason to persist the old issues

throwaway2048 13y ago
This is utter nonsense, "possible new issues" are every reason to carefully evaluate and weight new options.
sukuriant 13y ago
No. It's a car, and has the power to kill people on software malfunction, making it a critical system. Critical systems are tend to go through a much greater and more robust form of testing.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  The destructive potential of a car exceeds that of a lot of handguns one can buy. There have long been techniques for writing software as formal proofs of correctness. As far as I can tell, they haven't been popular with mainstream programmers because they are simply too different.
  - sukuriant 13y ago
    That is a really neat bit of fact; but, what does that have to do with what I was talking about? I really would like to know, it sounds like a really important insight, I'm just not sure what train of thought led to that.
Fomite 13y ago
No, but "Cars do uncomfortable things at high velocity" is not exactly an edge case.

sliverstorm 13y ago

Right. So, what happens when you are the one in that car, the car that teaches them better?

zobzu 13y ago

do you think that the gasoline cars don't have software updates? their engine is nowadays all software controlled and theres a fw update plug, generally under your driving wheel. and they'll update it when they service the car. how is that software any safer than the OTA? its not.

npizzolato 13y ago
I never said that. I was responding to "The easier it is to update software, the less important that it is bug-free."