KomfortablesKissen
You write shitty code and it breaks something? You should be punished accordingly.
You load libraries without checking each and every one and now something’s broken? You should be punished accordingly.
You load proprietary code and now something’s broken? You better checked the whole contract so you can punish the creators after you’ve been punished.
Software developers often have way more reach (over distance and over time) than they realize. They should be held accountable more like doctors or engineers.
You can be reasonable in your choice of words, but there are heads that need to roll. In this case it is not the one pushing the final button, but all those that created this system. Developers, Project Managers, Team Leaders, all the way up to the CEO. If the space to work in is so limited that the possibility of such pushes seems like a tolerable idea, then everything leading to this is broken. And people need to invest to make this right. Therefore there needs to be incentives, good and bad. To steer out of the current course there need to be very unfavorable incentives.
You can mock my argument by giving a ridiculous example. Once people die it will be too late. It’s why there was a time where people thought it to be a good idea to employ giant generators to keep the power in a hospital running even in case of a power outage. Or to have redundant systems in an airplane.
There is a need for adequate standards in the software world. Trusting businesses to create them will evidently kill people. Creating something like certificates for personal skills and products is severely lacking.
I can put the blame to your customers. If I make a contract with a bank they are responsible for my money. I don’t care about their choice of infrastructure. They are responsible for this. They have to be sued for this. Same for hospitals. Same for everyone else. Why should they be exempt from punishment for not providing the one service they were trusted to provide? Am I expected to feel for them because they made the “sensible choice” of employing the cheapest tools?
This was a business decision to trust someone external. It should not be tolerated that they point their fingers elsewhere.
Und die Versicherungen wollen nicht zahlen! Weil es kein Angriff ist!
War die Lebensmittelpyramide nicht sowieso Humbug?
Applying updates is considered good practice. Auto-applying is the best you can do with the money provided. My critique here is the amount of money provided.
Also, you cannot pull a Boeing and let people die just because you cannot 100% avoid accidents. There are steps in between these two states.
Nice! Thank you EU for the GDPR!
For the next step, please let the companies that produce software be held accountable for damages. For Nonprofits change the target to associated companies. Also punish the people responsible, like the developers, for their software and choice of used libraries. If the library was insufficiently supported by the developer, then the developer has no ground to sue for damages themselves.