They really seem like the NTSB of industrial chemical safety, and I really like the NTSB model. Learning from failure advances humanity.https://twitter.com/jefflanda/status/842521561525440512 …
-
-
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
Work the NTSB has done on analyzing failures, especially on human-machine interface design, has changed the world forever with its corpus.
9 replies 45 retweets 167 likes -
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
I think it's really a light in the tunnel of a profession's maturity. To deeply analyze failure, rather than paper it with scolding tweets.
2 replies 30 retweets 147 likes -
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
Bad failure analysis: "Don't do this." Good failure analysis: "Why did the intelligent human with their own goals decide to do this?"
6 replies 133 retweets 268 likes -
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
Didn't know Chemical Safety Board existed, or that I paid for it. But that is its own kind of unrecognized freedom in a society. Delegation.
5 replies 35 retweets 148 likes -
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
There's an interesting concept I discovered last year about reform and revolution, named "Chesterton's fence." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence …pic.twitter.com/fDQP7Rfvv0
6 replies 117 retweets 256 likes -
Replying to @SwiftOnSecurity
that's my #1 rule for working with legacy code: ugly code is probably ugly for a good reason. figure that out first.
1 reply 3 retweets 33 likes
Usually for a bad reason. But if you can't identity the reason you can't determine how it could be done right and still meet bad requirements.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.