3 ms·

This is a far more reasonable response to the Heartbleed situation. Earlier, Theo de Raadt's response on a mailing list was linked. Theo being himself was to b

by kosinus 13y ago

This is a far more reasonable response to the Heartbleed situation. Earlier, Theo de Raadt's response on a mailing list was linked. Theo being himself was to be expected, but that kind of talk doesn't help anyone.

stcredzero 12y ago
It's amazing how much noise to how little action the programming field produces. If the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, stalled planes would be falling out of the sky 100x more often, there would be no stick shakers and automated warning facilities, and the bulk of the reaction would be devoted to saying how incompetent the crashed pilots were. We need to take pragmatic actions that fix problems, not exchange recriminations and continue to live with the problems. In other words, we as a field sometimes use this algorithm: 1) Identify the problem 2) Repeat We should have fixed bounds checking and use after free errors by now.
- coldtea 12y ago
  >If the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, stalled planes would be falling out of the sky 100x more often On the other hand, if the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, we'd now be flying 10000000000 faster planes with warp drives, that take us to A-Centauri in an hour or so. And everybody would have one such plane, folded in his pocket.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - stcredzero 12y ago
    On the other hand, if the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, we'd now be flying 10000000000 faster planes with warp drives, that take us to A-Centauri in an hour or so. And everybody would have one such plane, folded in his pocket. If you're going to carry the analogy to that ridiculous corner then a black-hat hacker with a heartbleed equivalent blows up Earth in an antimatter explosion.
    - coldtea 12y ago
      Not any less riduculous than the original (old and tired) analogy. Plus, I don't recall computers having killed many people. Planes do. If planes were like computers, we'd just reboot them and carry on.
      - stcredzero 12y ago
        Not any less riduculous than the original (old and tired) analogy. You brought up the rotten analogy. I'm talking about what humans comparatively actually do or don't do in different fields, not making an analogy. (Please look "analogy" up.) Historically, aerospace is very good about taking concrete actions that actually reduce accident rates. Historically, computer programming is pretty rotten at this. Our algorithm is literally: 1) Identify the problem 2) Repeat With meaningless variations.
BuildTheRobots 12y ago
If you have the URL to hand still, I'd love to give his response a read (google did not help)

by kosinus 13y ago

stcredzero 12y ago

It's amazing how much noise to how little action the programming field produces. If the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, stalled planes would be falling out of the sky 100x more often, there would be no stick shakers and automated warning facilities, and the bulk of the reaction would be devoted to saying how incompetent the crashed pilots were. We need to take pragmatic actions that fix problems, not exchange recriminations and continue to live with the problems. In other words, we as a field sometimes use this algorithm: 1) Identify the problem 2) Repeat We should have fixed bounds checking and use after free errors by now.

coldtea 12y ago
>If the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, stalled planes would be falling out of the sky 100x more often On the other hand, if the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, we'd now be flying 10000000000 faster planes with warp drives, that take us to A-Centauri in an hour or so. And everybody would have one such plane, folded in his pocket.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- stcredzero 12y ago
  On the other hand, if the aerospace industry was like the programming industry, we'd now be flying 10000000000 faster planes with warp drives, that take us to A-Centauri in an hour or so. And everybody would have one such plane, folded in his pocket. If you're going to carry the analogy to that ridiculous corner then a black-hat hacker with a heartbleed equivalent blows up Earth in an antimatter explosion.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    Not any less riduculous than the original (old and tired) analogy. Plus, I don't recall computers having killed many people. Planes do. If planes were like computers, we'd just reboot them and carry on.
    - stcredzero 12y ago
      Not any less riduculous than the original (old and tired) analogy. You brought up the rotten analogy. I'm talking about what humans comparatively actually do or don't do in different fields, not making an analogy. (Please look "analogy" up.) Historically, aerospace is very good about taking concrete actions that actually reduce accident rates. Historically, computer programming is pretty rotten at this. Our algorithm is literally: 1) Identify the problem 2) Repeat With meaningless variations.

BuildTheRobots 12y ago

If you have the URL to hand still, I'd love to give his response a read (google did not help)