Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You see, this is a much older discussion than most folks think. Back in the 70s, there was a lot of talk then about how badly software was built. "If buildings were built the way software is built, the first strong wind would destroy civilization". Remedies were proposed, dogmas (er, sorry, methodologies) developed, proselytized, replaced. Languages came and went. Howling winds came (see the "voodoo gods" in Count Zero) when we connected this all to the internet. Y2K came and showed some of the underbelly.

So, tear it down and rebuild it securely is actually many years to late 1998.

There are a few that know how to build software that isn't swiss cheese. Just picking two that I know of, nobody reads the whole volume set (as noted in Coders at Work), and for the other one, nobody wants to use it because it isn't under active development. The idea, even today, that a chunk of important internet software can actually be finished seems to be met with cognitive dissonance.

And there are organizations that know how to build very good software. But in todays fast moving businesses, who wants to be in a CMM 5 organization? Doesn't sound like much fun to me, and probably not to you either.

My estimate of the last year that all of this could have been fixed was at least 30 years earlier than your estimate. Or sooner. I worked in an organization whose core software, running today, was first written about 50 years ago.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: