Re: JOB:Sr. SW Engineers Wanted-Fortune 500 Co

[Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net>]

Richard D Riehle wrote:

> -- snip
> Industrial engineers used to be taught to question whether 100%
> checking was appropriate for 0.001% errors.  This notion led to
> a question during a meeting I attended where we were planning the
> architecture for a hospital laboratory software system.  One of
> the system engineers asked, "Well, what is the probability of
> this event occurring?"  The laboratory manager replied, "We cannot
> rely on probability. We can kill people with this stuff."
> -- snip

<rant>
But, of course, one MUST rely on probability.  There is no other choice.
One can insist on higher standards, but that is itself relying on
probability.  The sun rising tomorrow is the classic statement of
certainty.  But the probability still hasn't reached 100%.  In fact, I
didn't see the sun rise today...

People must rely on either a numeric or an intuitive estimate of
probability.  It's a question of which one chooses to use.  In an informal
setting, I usually use the intuitive estimate, unless a more formal
estimate it REALLY easy.  But if people's lives depend on it, then one
should insist on a more formal estimate (unless it would be ridiculously
complicated).
</rant>