Computer error

[vetran]

A tulipload of cash

but much cheaper than it will be for the post office to compensate those convicted wrongly which hopefully will mean paying out millions and a few numpties being sacked.

I do feel the industry is ready for a mandatory standard of testing & design for systems handling commercial transactions. The daily slew of stupidity being displayed in my employer alone (who is actually rated quite highly) is quite depressing.

 

[mudskipper]

"More than 100 say they were wrongly prosecuted or made to repay money after computers made non-existent shortfalls." If two people claimed the system ****ed up, then it probably didn't. If 100 report the same problem, it's got to at least raise a 'reasonable doubt'.

 

[Mich the Tester]

I do feel the industry is ready for a mandatory standard of testing & design for systems handling commercial transactions. The daily slew of stupidity being displayed in my employer alone (who is actually rated quite highly) is quite depressing.

Put any number of testers greater than one (n) in a room and ask what proper testing means; you'll get n^n opinions; we can't agree on a body of knowledge or any such standards, we can't even agree on the intellectual roots of testing or systems design; some look to engineering and associated standards, others look to systems thinking (like me).

We need skeptical users.

 

[Mich the Tester]

"More than 100 say they were wrongly prosecuted or made to repay money after computers made non-existent shortfalls." If two people claimed the system ****ed up, then it probably didn't. If 100 report the same problem, it's got to at least raise a 'reasonable doubt'.

Nonsense. That's manager thinking; something that doesn't happen very often or isn't very common isn't very interesting or dangerous. Banking worked that way and in 2008 it was shown to be bad thinking. Read Gerald Weinberg's work and Nassim Taleb's books.

 

[vetran]

Put any number of testers greater than one (n) in a room and ask what proper testing means; you'll get n^n opinions; we can't agree on a body of knowledge or any such standards, we can't even agree on the intellectual roots of testing or systems design; some look to engineering and associated standards, others look to systems thinking (like me).

We need skeptical users.

problem there.

Audit trail, checks & balances needed.

 

[Mich the Tester]

problem there.

Audit trail, checks & balances needed.

If I'm investigating a system that is known to contain some serious bugs, should I believe what that system's audit trail says?

 

[vetran]

If I'm investigating a system that is known to contain some serious bugs, should I believe what that system's audit trail says?

because it is tested to a reasonable standard and the code is reviewed to ensure accuracy, of course none of these happen and errors occur.

If we had a Sarbanes Oxley style legislation (written by people who had actually seen a computer) for functionality we could see massive benefits.

You cannot trust companies to do a good job unless you put senior people at risk of censure/conviction.

 

[Mich the Tester]

because it is tested to a reasonable standard and the code is reviewed to ensure accuracy, of course none of these happen and errors occur.

If we had a Sarbanes Oxley style legislation (written by people who had actually seen a computer) for functionality we could see massive benefits.

You cannot trust companies to do a good job unless you put senior people at risk of censure/conviction.

I agree on giving 'senior people' the accountability that fits their remuneration, something that's painfully missing in the corporate world, but who's going to write the legislation? Have standards prevented crises? Did Basel 2 prevent banking crises? Did SOX prevent corruption?

What is a 'reasonable standard' of testing? I'd love to know; I've been in testing for more than 15 years and the more I learn, the less certainty I have of what constitutes good testing.

 

[TheFaQQer]

Private Eye have been talking about this issue for years - not only have people lost their homes and been sent to prison, but IIRC at least one was driven to suicide.

 

[Mich the Tester]

Private Eye have been talking about this issue for years - not only have people lost their homes and been sent to prison, but IIRC at least one was driven to suicide.

Wouldn't surprise me; all rather Kafkan. A Russian asylum seeker in Holland was driven to suicide a couple of months ago thanks to faults in a justice ministry system and uncritical users.

Will perhaps add Private Eye to my 'list of publications that every tester should read', which includes but does not entirely consist of;

An Introduction to General Systems Thinking, G Weinberg
Perfect Software: And Other Illusions about Testing, G Weinberg
The Edge of Chaos, M Waldrop
The Quark and the Jaguar, M Gell-Mann
The Demon Haunted World, C Sagan
The Black Swan, N Taleb
The Trial, F Kafka
...and much more