Hacker News Reader

In the matter of talking about bugs, I try to use terminology influenced by the SEI.

"It's crashed" --> "It has failed".

"It's behaving buggily" --> "There is a fault / it is faulting".

"It's a bug" --> "It's a defect".

The one to me that really matters is "defects". It's a matter of taste, but I find that the term "bug" implies mysterious agency. "Defect" correctly describes that ... there's a defect. Something is wrong and it can be fixed.

View on HN

Fault, error, failure, hazard. Technically speaking, nothing actually matters until it becomes a hazard (if you're a cynic, this means "costs you money"). I think that this is one way of thinking that engineers could benefit a lot from, in that framing issues within these boundaries gives you a lot more perspective.

Her point was far greater than that, and it was where the "defects" come from.

The answer is the system; not the individual. And that is one of the greatest leaps in understanding possible for a person.

Sure. There's a difference between assigning causes and assigning blame. But assuming that human error is the root of failure is a useful lie.

http://chester.id.au/2012/04/09/review-drift-into-failure/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com