2/ I feel like if just a small portion of that money were instead spent on higher-quality software, it'd be FAR more economically efficient.
-
-
Replying to @jeremiahg
: or slower-but-safer languages/runtimes. We pay the price eventually, might as well take the hit up front.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
exactly. I wonder how much more we’re paying ‘later’ than we otherwise might.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jeremiahg
: it's the sort of thing that in other industries is sorted out by regulation and industry standards...yet here we are writing C++
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
software regulation, it may come to that. did we every get regulation in any market w/o a severe set of catastrophes first?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @slightlylate
: and it should, IMO. It's disastrous for IOT devices to be sold at BOM prices that preclude space for updates & lack auto-update.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
market incentives all way out of whack. normally my libertarian brain rejects regs, but in this case, I see no alternative.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jeremiahg
: other industries farm out "compliance" to industry bodies. Workable here if regs phrased in terms of good outcome (patch speed)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
I think NERC functions similarly. So, there are workable models.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
: what we've learned from browsers is that patches can't be opt-in or require continual consent
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.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.