zlacker

[parent] [thread] 15 comments
1. munifi+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-03 00:08:18
The way we fix legacy software systems: By carefully refactoring it one step at a time and testing and monitoring to make sure our refactoring doesn't break stuff that's working correctly.

The big rewrite is always appealing but almost always doomed to failure. There is 200+ years of painfully learned lessons in the US legal code. If we throw it all out and start over, we'll have to re-learn all of those lessons one tragedy at a time.

replies(5): >>rapind+d >>Cerium+d2 >>enrage+B5 >>gumby+57 >>there_+Id
2. rapind+d[view] [source] 2020-06-03 00:09:53
>>munifi+(OP)
If only you could refactor faster than features are added...
3. Cerium+d2[view] [source] 2020-06-03 00:25:46
>>munifi+(OP)
How far can we push this software analogy...

The government is a PAAS business. They have various customers, both direct B2C, like you and me, and B2B relationships with other companies that run business on their platform. Either way the customers pay quarterly or yearly for the services through a system called taxes.

Political activists and are a type of white /gray hat hacker who seeks to demonstrate exploitable flaws in the platform and may benefit through bug bounties from backers or through getting advantageous features implemented. Lobbyists are a kind of social engineer that also wishes to influence feature decisions.

Legislators are a type of software developer. Their job is complicated by the lack of adequate test and simulation environments, and the presence of competing interests who frequently oppose the suggested features or implementation decisions but whose approval is often needed for the PR to garnish approval.

replies(2): >>ErikAu+T2 >>gumby+e7
◧◩
4. ErikAu+T2[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 00:31:30
>>Cerium+d2
Well, a federal legislator has the states as a test environment. One of the great things about a federal system.
5. enrage+B5[view] [source] 2020-06-03 00:52:37
>>munifi+(OP)
>>The way we fix legacy software systems: By carefully refactoring it one step at a time and testing and monitoring to make sure our refactoring doesn't break stuff that's working correctly.

We no longer have the time for a slow approach where we make small changes and test and see. The system we have is not functioning, period, and end-users are protesting in the tens of thousands across all major cities in the country.

replies(2): >>runawa+mn >>mythrw+mp
6. gumby+57[view] [source] 2020-06-03 01:04:28
>>munifi+(OP)
> The way we fix legacy software systems: By carefully refactoring it one step at a time and testing and monitoring to make sure our refactoring doesn't break stuff that's working correctly.

Have to be careful with this as these protest are about things that are indeed working as designed.

◧◩
7. gumby+e7[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 01:05:41
>>Cerium+d2
> How far can we push this software analogy...

People used to talk about the "Microsoft tax"... well this system already has Federal, State, and local taxes...

8. there_+Id[view] [source] 2020-06-03 02:08:23
>>munifi+(OP)
The way we fix most legacy software systems is by replacing them with newer, different ones.
◧◩
9. runawa+mn[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 04:01:15
>>enrage+B5
We don’t have the capacity or runway to rebuild from scratch either.
replies(1): >>kbenso+pr
◧◩
10. mythrw+mp[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 04:22:19
>>enrage+B5
If the system wasn't functioning "period" the protesters wouldn't even be able to protest though. They wouldn't have gas, they wouldn't have food, they wouldn't have phones, they wouldn't have any sort of protection and the powerful would kill them and they would disappear from history.

That's not to say there aren't serious problems or the system couldn't be improved, nor to say the system functions well for everyone at all times because it doesn't. It obviously favors some people over others. But taken as a whole, it functions and we have a pretty good life.

You know what life has been like for most people in most places and times? What the system was in those places? The strong nakedly rape and abuse the weak. Hunger. No recourse. Zero justice except might and whatever charity came along. Gulags. Genocide. No say whatsoever and constant want and fear.

It's manifest this system functions fairly well all things considered. It allows you to sit here in comfort and say that for instance. To say any differently is either very naive or very disingenuous.

There are problems. There is injustice. There is corruption. We need to work on those things. But anyone out to overturn the system should do a little deep thinking first.

replies(1): >>dragon+IP
◧◩◪
11. kbenso+pr[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 04:42:07
>>runawa+mn
Guess it's time to move fast and break things. I hope we don't break anything too important...
replies(2): >>jacobu+9L >>Red_Le+yT1
◧◩◪◨
12. jacobu+9L[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 07:49:34
>>kbenso+pr
Trump does that :-/
◧◩◪
13. dragon+IP[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 08:34:13
>>mythrw+mp
I think the problem is that for a significant proportion of the US population, it appears that they don't have a "Pretty good life" and the fact that you can even say this shows you are not paying attention.

From what I am learning, if you are black and encounter the police, then you life is in their hands, and depending upon your luck, things have a real chance of going badly for you. Black people are telling of how they avoid at all cost dealing with law enforcement.

How is that "pretty good"?

It's easy when you are in a position of privilege, easy to assume that everybody has the opportunity you have, easy to think that everybody is treated as you are. What the events of the last week have show is that this is not the case. If you are black, then your world is very different.

replies(1): >>mythrw+Ko2
◧◩◪◨
14. Red_Le+yT1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 16:36:14
>>kbenso+pr
Like healthcare? Privacy? Freedom from enslavement? Right to trial by a court of peers? A level footing between apenniless person and a billionaire? Crumbling infrastructure? Toxic water and food? Freedom from persecution?

We've been moving slow and pulling up the ladders behind us for hundreds of years. Things only trickle down when there's profit. That needs to change. These protests are exposing that game.

replies(1): >>kbenso+WP2
◧◩◪◨
15. mythrw+Ko2[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 19:02:46
>>dragon+IP
Something like 1000 people a year are killed by police in the US.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de...

A larger than should be expected percentage of them are black. And this of course doesn't include harassment or other indignities inflicted on black people because of race. Also not those abuses by non police because of race.

It should be noted some number of these killings were entirely appropriate to protect life.

The point is, even though we have problems, and as this points out, we clearly do, the chance of being killed by the police for being black is very very small.

So rhetoric about "privilege" aside, ya, there is a lot of opportunity for people. Very few people go hungry in the US. There is general freedom of movement, freedom to vote, freedom to own property, some semblance of legal protection. Contrast that to say for example Boco Haram or Europe in 900AD or Baghdad during the Mongol invasions or so many other times and places, past and present in human history.

So I'm going to stick with my original thesis because it's true. We have problems. We also have ways to correct them. We also have a general understanding we should correct them. But claiming the "system doesn't work period" in hopes of <what?> is complete bollocks and in fact is usually something spoiled rich white kids say.

◧◩◪◨⬒
16. kbenso+WP2[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-03 21:26:32
>>Red_Le+yT1
I'm pretty sure you've imposed your own assumptions on what I meant when I said that.

That said, if all you see are the problems, it's easy to think there's no downside. It's entirely possible for other aspects of our society to get worse as we focus on those items. It's also possible for those aspects to get worse as we fail to make any meaningful change on the items we focus on, and eventually fail.

Assuming only positives can come from change is very dangerous. That doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt things anyways, but we should do so with eyes wide open, and not delusional as to the possible outcomes.

[go to top]