Traceable Infrastructure is as vulnerable as traceable messages.

[Eugene Leitl]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Trei, Peter wrote:

> I hate to say this, but until software developers are held (at least
> at the corporate level) in some way liable for their failures, there
> will be little or no improvement in the situation.

I think this is the wrong approach to the situation. Making people liable
stifles innovation. The customers abundantly prove that they don't care. I
know it, because I've talked to the customers. They might complain, but in
a curiously perfunctory manner, their lips move, but their neurons don't
spike.

In the market, everybody is free to use more stable components for the
mission critical systems. If they make a difference (apparently, not on
the short run, if at all, since businesses are either operating in a
largely brownian market, or are running in an irrational regime, since
capable to afford very broad error margins), the marketplace will select
for fitter products. If they do not, well, too bad.

Where people's life are at stake the product as a whole is certified, and
the producer is already liable. There's no point in introducing a
Hippocrates oath for the code samurai in the field. There will be fewer
programmers, the average programmer will be better, but you're paying by
arresting progress. See small civilian aircraft for an illustration. If
you're afraid of change, the customer eventually suffers.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBMTO  : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204
57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3