3 ms·
What if the bug was severe security bugs, several of them which definitely helped make the software better ? I've been a firm believer that there are "million d
by prettyrandom100 12y ago
What if the bug was severe security bugs, several of them which definitely helped make the software better ? I've been a firm believer that there are "million dollar bugs" that could destroy the product completely, shouldn't those be considered big problems for world's organizations ?
I think I might have already learned these things you pointed out in the 1 year I spent, does adding one more year really help much ?
- brudgers 12y agoLet's say there's a 1% chance of a $1,000,000 bug. Insuring against it costs $12,000/year (expected payout * 1.2). It takes 40 hours @ $100/hour * 2.0 overhead to fix it = $8000: And the expected net value of 40 hours of developer work is $4000. This makes fixing the bug versus insuring against it a wash. Assessing risk and evaluating alternatives is the basis for rational business decision making. Throw in a 1% chance that the bug fix produces a $100 regression bug, and the business case is for insurance. Again there's nothing wrong with quitting a job you hate. But it is probably a mistake to assume that the entire operation is staffed by incompetents. People have different perspectives based on their job responsibility. Good luck.
- prettyrandom100 12y agoI never said anything about the competence of the staff, it's just the politics. Also I'm not talking about insuring against the bug, but meriting a bug (or any work) based on the difficulty/impact.