Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Michael Gemar

@tef @mawhrin But it’s caused by *humans* failing to do stuff properly. Thinking of it like gravity implies there is nothing that could have been done.

7 comments
tef

@michaelgemar @mawhrin

i am glad you don't work in the construction industry, as we'd all be camping outside

tef

@michaelgemar @mawhrin

the point you're missing here is that "we build processes that incorporate human error as a given, or they collapse, much like how we build literal buildings knowing full well we are subject to the laws of gravity"

tef

@michaelgemar @mawhrin

your point of "ah, but isn't it always human error!" is missing how human error is used to excuse systematic failures of risk management—the load bearing word here is "blaming"

your processes should account for "an intern pressed the wrong key because their manager threatened to fire them"

that's why we have things like building codes, building inspections, certified professionals involved, rather than simply being "someone forgot a brick lol, never mind

Michael Gemar

@tef @mawhrin I don’t think we ultimately disagree.

Michael Gemar

@tef @mawhrin I agree, but it’s also us *building* the processes — they’re not just natural forces. If we fail to build resilient processes, that in itself is human error.

Fred Hebert

@michaelgemar @tef @mawhrin
Why are people shipping the code "causing" more outages than the people signing the checks? There are systemic and situational elements in play.

The lens of human error stalls investigations and prevents learning.

flere-imsaho

@michaelgemar @tef there's a reason the process looks like this and it's not because people don't know the risks of such deployments.

safe software engineering practices are not cost-effective. (until today happens.)

Go Up