Slashdot Mirror


Sent To Jail Because of a Software Bug

First time accepted submitter toshikodo writes "The BBC is reporting a claim that some sub-post office workers in the UK have been sent to jail because of a bug in the accounting software that they use. The Post Office admits Horizon computer defect. I've worked on safety critical system in the past, and I am well aware of the potential for software to ruin lives (thankfully AFAIK nobody has been harmed by my software), but how many of us consider the potential for bugs in ordinary software to adversely affect those that use it?"

239 comments

  1. Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and shit like this doesn't happen or can at least be properly traced back by a third party and gives people the means to defend themselves.

    1. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That and $5 can get you a nice cuppa coffee at Starbucks!

    2. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself, its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off

    3. Re:Open Source... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But at least the option to fix it yourself actually exists.

    4. Re:Open Source... by BonzaiThePenguin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everyone assumes someone is already out there testing all open-source software, which is why it never seems to get done.

      Also, deliberate bugs and backdoors simply wouldn't be checked back in.

    5. Re:Open Source... by c0lo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Everyone assumes someone is already out there testing all open-source software, which is why it never seems to get done.
      Also, deliberate bugs and backdoors simply wouldn't be checked back in.

      TFA quote:

      Ms Hamilton said that, by the time the figure reached £36,000, she lied to the Post Office - wrongly telling them the books were balancing just so that she could open the office the next day.

      With closed-source, the choices Ms Hamilton has:
      * keep covering the differences caused by the bug
      * refuse to pay and instead sue the Post Office/Royal Mail with the hope they'll ask Horizon computer system to check. Not going to happen: the plaintiff carries the burden of proof, the Post Office has no incentive to do anything.

      With OSS, Ms Hamilton has (alone or in by association with other sub-postmasters) the choice between:
      * do the same as for close source. or
      * hire a QA team and, upon obtaining the proof, sue the Post Office for the unwarranted requests, cost of source audit and other unspecified damages. The Post Office has the choice between to keep losing such suits or pay their own source audit/QA process and release the fixes in OSS.

      I wonder which of the two would minimize the total social cost of the package maintenance (in the very specific terms of the "unseen costs")?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    6. Re:Open Source... by someone1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A really wise post office chief would have done that audit before the first lawsuit.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    7. Re:Open Source... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself

      Red Hat does. Even Ubuntu will to some extent. Any time you want you can get paid support for OSS and, given the right support contract and money they really will take care of you properly. The definitely take responsibility for the things they promise. (N.B. your two dollar desktop license really doesn't promise much at all).

      Its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off

      And this is the thing. We have seen before that people were sent to jail for bugs in breathalyzers. In some cases people who claimed these bugs were in courts that demanded source; they were set free. In other cases the proprietary software companies behind the machines managed to get them locked away without a fair trial.

      If the shit hits the fan with OSS you always have one more option and the possibility to approach multiple support suppliers. This won't happen for free and it likely won't be included in any existing agreements, however you may be happy for the chance to spend $15000 on software consultancy and not spend the rest of your life in some US State hellhole. Your proprietary software vendor will be thinking of all the other people that might sue about a bug like that and will never ever help you out of the problem.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    8. Re:Open Source... by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself, its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off

      If you buy in proprietary software that is broken, you need to get the vendor to fix it. If you've directly contracted a small software vendor to write the system for you then that might be fine. If you buy in FOSS then you can pay your vendor to fix it, or you can fix it yourself, or you can pay a third party contractor to fix it. Sure, if you decide to just install FOSS software yourself without paying a vendor then (surprise) you can't expect someone to fix it for you, but thats the risk you take if you want to be cheap - if you're _paying_ for someone to support this stuff then FOSS gives you better flexibility if the vendor turns out to be unhelpful (this is important for bigger projects - For example, I'm still waiting on Apple to fix a load of bugs that I reported over a year ago; if that was FOSS code I could've fixed them myself or paid someone to do it but since it isn't I have no choice but to hope that Apple will fix this stuff, which I fully expect them not to ever do.)

      However, in this case I think the point is more relevant that as this was closed source software, the subpostmasters couldn't really defend themselves. If it was FOSS they could've paid an expert to look at the source code and prove that they were innocent.

    9. Re:Open Source... by DrSkwid · · Score: 0

      You're talking shit.

      I can buy from a vendor and get the source as part of the deal, no source, no deal.

      If I reveal this source code to the sub-post offices and continue to buy from the vendor.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    10. Re:Open Source... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I reveal this source code to the sub-post offices and continue to buy from the vendor...

      then...?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    11. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself

      I take it that you haven't bought much mission critical software.

      You are never going to get a company to sign a contract that gives the liability in case their software malfunctions.

      They will be willing to fix bugs that you report (Just like with OSS.) but if you are their only customer for the software they are going to charge you for the time it takes them to fix the bugs.

    12. Re:Open Source... by nooneelsesname · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are the one talking shit, buddy. You think sub-postmasters buy this software? The Post Office REQUIRES them to use it. There is no way they would allow the sub-postmasters to see the code, and even if they did, how many of these little guys do you think can read code. If it was open source there would be geeks interested in the claims of the sub-postmasters who would be delighted to reveal that the evil Post-Office was screwing the little guy. They would do it for fun. And if there was noone to review the code voluntarily, the sub-postmasters could gang up to hire an INDEPENDANT consultant to do so.

    13. Re:Open Source... by Spottywot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A really wise post office chief would have done that audit before the first lawsuit.

      Yes you are correct, but the trouble is that the word 'Postmaster' conjours an image of someone with authority over a medium to largish business. In reality a lot of postmasters in the UK are simply running a family business/ small shop that just happens to be the Post office as well. A lot of these people have no real business training, do some very simple bookkeeping themselves, and when some software comes along that they've never had to use before, that software had better be bug free and easy enough to use. Before anyone says no software is bug free, I know that, by bug free I mean 'not going to add 13,000 to the turnover of a small business seemingly at random' . In short I think blaming the Postmasters for not being wise enough is just a wee bit disingenuous.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    14. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      That would amout to an uprising against the bankster class who run our countries. Will not be allowed. You are supposed to enjoy the movies in cinema and then donate a son for their next war at the Shat-El-Arab. The two finger which will remain of him will be draped in a British flag, even though he died for the Bankster nation, actually.

    15. Re: Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can i help you? Are you lost or something?

    16. Re:Open Source... by N1AK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's assume that for the sake of the example an equivalent piece of software was available at a viable price and was open source.

      A small shopkeeper (what most postmasters in the UK are these days) is shown to have a considerable amount of missing money. They are prosecuted by the post office and a jury convicts them. The fact the 'computer' says the money is missing is a part of the evidence against them but if the 'know' they didn't take the money and it can't possibly have been anyone else who works for them then surely they could already pay auditors to track the transaction records and show they don't make sense right? Except that would assume that they think to do it, are confident it will prove their innocence and can afford the considerable cost upfront.

      Yes, in theory, open source lets you check. However a bug in a complex accountancy system is likely to be very difficult and if you didn't find the bug then it could actually strengthen the evidence against you.

      I like open source; it is not, however, a panacea to all the worlds ills. The bigger question here is how a prosecution started by faulty accounting software ended in a conviction. Unless the defence did a very poor job, the prosecution overstated their case or the jury mis-applied 'reasonable doubt' surely this shouldn't have happened.

    17. Re:Open Source... by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 2

      Except that's a crap line (which I have spouted in the past). Gnash is the perfect example - you have the opportunity to fix it, but the source code is such a pain in the ass to get around that nobody does it. Pick any large project with long standing bugs - why are they long standing? Because nobody wants to fix it - whether for lack of ability, lack of replication of the bug, or fear of the rip-off's license agreement (which is why there are, what, 5 gnash developers on the planet). Pick a large project with long standing bugs (memory leaks in firefox were a good example until too many people complained about it) and ask yourself why those bugs are long standing and well documented.

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    18. Re:Open Source... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Open source is a licensing model. Taking responsibility is part of the contract. The difference between open source and proprietary code is that you have the option of going to more than one company to get it audited or get bugs fixed with open source. You can negotiate a better support contract because there are multiple companies willing to take your money. If you're buying software without a support contract then you're in a similar boat with open source or proprietary software: with open source you either fix it yourself (or pay someone else to fix it for you) or wait for the next version, with proprietary software you buy the next version, and in both cases you hope that the next version fixes it.

      Don't conflate community supported with open source. Just because you have a license that grants you the ability to redistribute and modify the code does not mean that you aren't handing over a big pile of money to have someone willing to fix bugs on short notice.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    19. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't be the case if people cared enough to pay a developer to fix them..

      Just because companies can fix them doesn't mean they will. If you want to succeed in using "open source" than pay the developers to fix the bugs already. Otherwise you've already failed.

    20. Re:Open Source... by Redmancometh · · Score: 1

      Package management is what I call trimming my pubes.

    21. Re:Open Source... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Gnash is the perfect example - you have the opportunity to fix it, but the source code is such a pain in the ass to get around that nobody does it. Pick any large project with long standing bugs...

      I don't consider Gnash even close to being a large project. OpenOffice.org, Linux Kernel, Ubuntu, KDE, Firefox, Second life.. Sure.

      Pick any large project with long standing bugs - why are they long standing? Because nobody wants to fix it

      I decided to look at the longest standing bug in Ubuntu that was recently closed (bug 1):

      https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

      It doesn't appear to match your explanation.

      Pick a large project with long standing bugs (memory leaks in firefox were a good example until too many people complained about it) and ask yourself why those bugs are long standing and well documented.

      Wasn't the issue in Firefox that people couldn't reproduce it (I couldn't)? And there was no reasonable documentation presented to explain exactly where the issue was.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    22. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then those subpostmasters can fix it themselves and enjoy going to jail for "hacking the computar" in addition to the embezzelling they didn't do!

    23. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me, when exactly did it become part of the sub-postmasters remit to hire a QA team? When did handing out stamps and collecting parcels turn in to a software company?

      I work in QA. When asked "what do you do?", I responed "I work in QA".

      Do you know what the response from anyone outside the tech world is (and there's even be a few insiders)?

      "What is QA?"

      So yes, you can loft on about Open Source and QA all you like, but you're not understanding or addressing the issue.

    24. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that was micromanagement.

    25. Re:Open Source... by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 1

      Funny, but bug 1 wasn't fixed by Ubuntu, and doesn't match the spirit of the discussion (e.g. a bug in software, not sales). There were no tools around to detect and determine the fault. IIRC at the time most techs couldn't reproduce but almost every consumer I ran into (and read about) could. Figures.

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    26. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, "long-standing bugs" are an irritation in open source, which anyone can fuck off and fix themselves if it is irritating enough. Those long-standing bugs are because nobody with sufficient skill is sufficiently irritated.

      In the proprietary world there are no "long-standing bugs" because customers accept the crap they buy as a standard, the bug becomes a standard, the limitations and lack of interoperability become a standard. Companies even crow about the security benefits of insular, unshareable datasets - which they can archive for a posterity where they will not have backwards-compatible software to read their archive.

    27. Re: Open Source... by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

      All that is necessary is for the system to have a proper transaction level audit trail, and run that data through another system in oder to find the error. Not having the audit trail should be the crime. They are taking the wrong people to court.

    28. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't matter if they preemptively do the audit, as that's not necessarily going to uncover the bug. I can say from experience that a bug you know exists is 1000 times easier to find than a bug you don't know exists.

    29. Re:Open Source... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Yes, in theory, open source lets you check. However a bug in a complex accountancy system is likely to be very difficult and if you didn't find the bug then it could actually strengthen the evidence against you.

      I like open source; it is not, however, a panacea to all the worlds ills. The bigger question here is how a prosecution started by faulty accounting software ended in a conviction. Unless the defence did a very poor job, the prosecution overstated their case or the jury mis-applied 'reasonable doubt' surely this shouldn't have happened.

      Complexity isn't always required to screw things up. You could do that using nothing but Windows Calculator.

      I agree that open source is no panacea, but nevertheless I myself use GnuCash for my accounts, and it's pretty straightforward for most things.

      The main thing, however, is that I don't blindly accept the computer's figures, I cross-check them.

      The software provider carries certain obligations (moral, if not legal ones), but so do the users.

    30. Re:Open Source... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      And this is the thing. We have seen before that people were sent to jail for bugs in breathalyzers.

      I would have thought that an actual blood test would be mandatory for any case that goes to court before any sentence can be passed. If for no other reason, some cough medicines could get you into trouble this way without actually impairing you in any legal sense.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    31. Re:Open Source... by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      It would still be traceable, as the source code still exists, you just do not have it.
      And in jail you are not going to be able to track down a bug anyways.

      And this is the reason you would want closed source commercial software. Because then it would not just be you held responsible, but the vender who supplied the software as well.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    32. Re:Open Source... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself

      Red Hat does. Even Ubuntu will to some extent. Any time you want you can get paid support for OSS and, given the right support contract and money they really will take care of you properly. The definitely take responsibility for the things they promise. (N.B. your two dollar desktop license really doesn't promise much at all).

      You don't even need paid support. Hire a computer programmer and tell him to fix it and part of his job is to upstream it. He needs to work well with upstream software projects. Move him from project to project. There you go.

    33. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The buck stops at the employee using the software. If they should realize that responsibility and request a larger pay for it. The same thing happens with an engineer using a software package. You must verify the results and gain confidence in the software. I do see this situation as tricky though. With the software package management assumes anyone can do the job and hire that way. They don't realize that the software should not be replacing a skill set, but increasing productivity.

    34. Re:Open Source... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

      According to the article she wasn't prosecuted over the missing money. She was prosecuted for telling her superior the books were in balance when they actually showed she owed the post office 36,000 pounds. She didn't have much choice -- they wouldn't let her open if the books didn't balance, and they weren't exactly working overtime to fix the bug -- but in the UK this is "accounting fraud." That's what she got convicted of. It's not fair, but technically it's what is supposed to happen when you tell people your books are fine and they actually say you're in the whole thousands and thousands of quid.

      There are very few court systems that will believe a convicted fraudster's claim that it was all just a misunderstanding (read: computer bug), so not only did she get convicted, and lose her business; she is also currently re-paying the 36k.

      Open-source probably would not have helped her much. In theory the bug could have been fixed by somebody, but it's not like sub-post-masters who accidentally commit fraud are likely to understand code.

    35. Re:Open Source... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I thought it already was just about everywhere if only because they want to avoid a costly trial with a loss due to a defence lawyer referring to situations where a breathalyzer tests failed to give accurate results.

    36. Re:Open Source... by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's another option that open source gives you that proprietary software doesn't: You can pay someone else to fix it. If it's really that irritating to you, but you really don't want to work on it yourself, why not use some cash to convince a developer to fix your bug? You'll get what you want, the developer will get some cash, and the project will have its bug fixed. Everyone wins.

      What you're really demanding is that volunteers do what you want them to do free of charge. What will actually happen is that volunteers will do whatever they damn well please.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    37. Re:Open Source... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

      You don't seem to understand how the post office works in the UK. A sub-post-master is a mail-man.

      His boss would be a full postmaster. Since the post is privatized technically all the subpostmasters are independent businesses, which means they are supposed to look out for themselves, they aren't really capable of hiring a QA team.

    38. Re:Open Source... by BemoanAndMoan · · Score: 1

      then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself, its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off

      You sound like the sort of anonymous coward (appropriate) who's part of the "hey, why should I pay for support if the product is free" crowd. If you are using it, chances are you are making money off of it, and off the many devs who have contributed and the *paying* clients who pay for support, fixes and updates.

      And where are you? Standing there whining with a cup in your hand, pissed off because nobody gives a shit about your problems. OS doesn't mean free, chuckles. You need something fixing according to your own needs and timeline, man up and give back something to the community. Doesn't even have to be code or cash, drop the dev a line and trade some documenting time or support work on the forums to get your issue dealt with.

      So, go ahead and piss into the wind while the rest of us make the most out of OS by treating as part of our business instead of something the world owes us.

    39. Re:Open Source... by sribe · · Score: 1

      In short I think blaming the Postmasters for not being wise enough is just a wee bit disingenuous.

      The post to which you are responding said "post office chief", not "postmaster". In other words, whoever is the head of you postal service should not have started suing postmasters without checking to make sure that the basis of the suits was solid.

    40. Re:Open Source... by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 1

      Gnash is the perfect example - you have the opportunity to fix it, but the source code is such a pain in the ass to get around that nobody does it. Pick any large project with long standing bugs...

      I don't consider Gnash even close to being a large project. OpenOffice.org, Linux Kernel, Ubuntu, KDE, Firefox, Second life.. Sure.

      Gnash is not being presented as a large project, it is presented as an open-source project that is not, in any practical sense, 'fix it yourself' (admittedly, the referenced post would be clearer if it had a paragraph break between the Gnash example and the claim concerning large projects.)

      Wasn't the issue in Firefox that people couldn't reproduce it (I couldn't)? And there was no reasonable documentation presented to explain exactly where the issue was.

      Far from refuting the claim that 'fix it yourself' is largely a myth, this observation is actually supporting evidence for the proposition that 'fix it yourself' can be impractically difficult, even if you have the source.

      Combine these observations with this about Ubuntu's 'bug 1', and it is clear that while your post looks superficially like a rational argument, it is actually just a collection of non-sequiturs.

    41. Re:Open Source... by tqk · · Score: 1

      There's another option that open source gives you that proprietary software doesn't: You can pay someone else to fix it.

      That would cut into shareholder dividends and BoD bonuses, and for what? A fixed bug? Improved functionality? Whoopee. You're talkin' commynism.

      I've given up trying to understand those people. They appear to think money paid out in salaries, regardless of how well spent, is just one degree away from being flushed down the drain. Capitalists, my ass.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    42. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this bug needs to be reopened. ms still has majority desktop. cell phones are not desk tops.

    43. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The must successful and in some ways nastiest capitalists use FOSS to the extreme: Google and Apple. Google is now so successful they started to do politics, as making more money is too boring and too easy.

    44. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is called a false dilemma. She SHOULD have done was ask for an audit immediately once there was a discrepancy, called in a third party to check and provide eye witness, and she could have hired a QA team to test the software without using the source code.

      With OSS, Hamilton might have been able to do that. Of course, it may have cost far more than the £9,000.00. Not to mention, such a review might not have found any problem. After all, it passed QA before.

    45. Re:Open Source... by Internal+Modem · · Score: 1

      Really? Where in TFA did you get any information about the "bug" that would support your claim?

    46. Re:Open Source... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      you have the opportunity to fix it, but the source code is such a pain in the ass to get around that nobody does it.

      That's called laziness. But who's more lazy? The developer, who didn't warrant his software in the first place, or the people who have the opportunity to fix it, but instead choose to complain about it?

    47. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hire a QA team"

      Yeah right. Someone who doesn't know how to install a printer will think of investing hundred of thousand of dollars to hire a QA team in order to track a software bug that may exist. It's exactly like the last time I bought my defective 5.1 audio system. I Hired a team of engineer, who made an analysis of everything to tell me what was wrong in order to send it back to the store and get a refund. Oh wait... I remember... I didn't do that!

      Anyway, most open source software come with an AS IS clause. So no suing possible.

      Captcha : bitterly.

    48. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope - A Breath test, blood test or a policeman's statement that you were under the influence are each enough to convict in NY. The police are not obligated to do any formal test. 'His eyes were bloodshot, his speech was slurred and he was unsteady on his feet'.

      That a cop's testimony is sufficient is surprising to many, but police are deemed expert witlessness's. I knew of someone who had a bad speech disability who was convicted on the police testimony alone. This happened in a small LI town where the revenue for the police dept and courts all come from fines and convictions.

    49. Re:Open Source... by prelelat · · Score: 1

      There was one post master who claimed to have been charged upward of 30 pounds in theft. There were others with large sums as well that went missing. If they believe there was a bug in the software and got together I'm sure they could find the bug, clear their name and seek restitution for what they had to pay back. If enough of them got together and bought even a couple guys I'm sure they would be better off financially as well as having their names cleared, keeping their houses and contracts.

      That's options 1.

      Option 2 is to have someone start a business that analyses specific problems with the postmasters. They can look at the code and even go over policies and procedures with the post masters. Charge a licensing fee for the extra support that you offer, have it be an unbiased third party.

      With the amount of money at risk to being lost and the number of sub-post masters that they were talking about in the article it wouldn't even have to be a large amount of money from each sub-post master to sustain someone specifically to look at the code for them.

      You talk about communism but I don't think the moment you start working together it's communism nor is it a bad thing. This isn't 1950's U.S. this is 2013 UK.

      I'm not saying they should be open source or not, they could give access to the code to a third party company so that they could trouble shoot it anyways with NDA and all that jazz. In the end the story here is that these folks are apparently being screwed by the post office and they have no recourse to prove it. The same thing could happen to anyone using closed sourced software to do accounting or other sensitive work. One bug could land people in jail and your are shit out of luck to prove it was a bug. Not having the option to hire someone to look at the code is scary in that aspect.

    50. Re:Open Source... by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      Yes, you are correct. But the trouble is that i never used the word 'Postmaster'. In short i think blaming me using that word is a wee bit disingenuous.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    51. Re:Open Source... by sjames · · Score: 1

      You have the option even if it's hard. For proprietary software, you'll never get to even see the twisted crap code behind the product to decide if it's too hard to be worth your time or not.

      If you're about to go to jail, you'd be happy the code is up for examination and one or two independent experts testifying that the code is a twisted steaming pile that can't be trusted might be helpful to your defense.

    52. Re:Open Source... by Spottywot · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed, touche and apologies for the comprehension error. It would have been considerate to say the least of the Post office master to check if there was actually any missing money or case to answer. It would have been especially nice for it to have been done before that particular woman( I forget her name) , started to cook the books because every time she phoned to dispute the calculations they slapped another few thousand on her shortfall.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    53. Re:Open Source... by tqk · · Score: 1

      You talk about communism but I don't think the moment you start working together it's communism nor is it a bad thing.

      I was being facetious, and I agree with you. There's nothing inherently evil in it, assuming no-one's forced into it (consenting adults, and all that). Community is generally a positive thing.

      I was more marvelling at the phenomenon of people doling out king's ransoms for "stuff" while resenting whole heartedly the very idea of having to pay staff compensation. People are happily plunking down tens of thousands of dollars for Oracle licences while penny-pinching each and every cent paid to those who can manipulate the thing. I don't understand where this inherently "anti-labour" attitude comes from or why it persists. I also think a lot of those paying out for Oracle would be just as well served for a fraction of the cost by MySQL, and some even by SQLite. Yet they focus on the cost of labour instead. It's nonsensical.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    54. Re:Open Source... by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Tell me, when exactly did it become part of the sub-postmasters remit to hire a QA team?

      Look, into a situation of "hire a QA team" or "go bankrupt paying unwarranted charges because of bugs", which one would you prefer?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    55. Re:Open Source... by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      And this is the thing. We have seen before that people were sent to jail for bugs in breathalyzers.

      It would be interesting to see cites of those cases where the breathalyzer had a bug. In California, Breathalyzers (like radar guns) have to follow a rigorous certification schedule. Breathalyzer evidence can be rejected if the police can't prove that the machine was properly tested, both before and after your own test.

      I would have thought that an actual blood test would be mandatory for any case that goes to court before any sentence can be passed. If for no other reason, some cough medicines could get you into trouble this way without actually impairing you in any legal sense.

      If the cough medicine can be detected in your blood, it can be detected in your breath or urine as well. All three techniques measure your blood alcohol percentage. If that percentage is too high, it doesn't matter how it got there - you're still legally (and probably, actually) impaired. If you claim that cough medicine will cause a breathalyzer to give false results, please provide cites.

      In any case, requiring a blood sample to go to court would obviously require every suspected DUI driver to go through an outright invasive process (poking a hole in the largest organ of your body), as opposed to using naturally expelled waste materials. And blood testing is subject to its own errors - the sample must be properly stored, labeled, tested, etc. There is normally a several day delay before results are known, more opportunity for mixing up records, etc. A Breathalyzer, OTOH, provides immediate results.

      In California, drivers can opt for blood, breath, or urine tests. Results from any of the three are accepted as evidence. Declining all is a separate offence which can result in losing your license. (And you can still be convicted of DUI based on the officer's testimony).

    56. Re:Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not like Microsoft ever fixes its own bugs either. Windows and MSVC make my life a living hell, every day.

  2. In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A government spokesman has stated they have "absolute confidence" in all their computer systems, and what happened to Mr. Buttle was merely an unfortunate accident that could have happened to anyone.

    1. Re:In related news... by Baby+Duck · · Score: 2

      Wish I had mod points to congratulate this relevant shout out to Brazil.

      --

      "Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins

    2. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ``We don't make mistakes!"

      (crunch)

    3. Re:In related news... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      A government spokesman has stated they have "absolute confidence" in all their computer systems

      Citation please. Neither the summary nor the article quote anyone as saying that. It appears, unattributed, in a picture caption.

      The article presents no evidence that the missing money was caused by computer bugs. Just that the software contains bugs. But any complex software has bugs. They say nothing about the severity or nature of the bugs. Did the bugs cause anyone to receive extra money? No? Just missing money? A program cannot just make money "disappear". There is still a transaction that it needs to be reconciled against. How many stamps were sold? How much money was run through the postage meter? What bank transactions were made? In order to convict someone of theft, that reconciliation would have been done. I think these people are just thieves that got caught, and are now trying to get off.

    4. Re:In related news... by Common+Joe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You make great points, but I am forced to disagree with you on your conclusion. I don't come to conclusion that "these people are just thieves that got caught and are now trying to get off".

      There's a guy who I knew who was sent to jail. He was charged with murder of his girlfriend. There were steroids, cocaine, and a fatal seizure involved. Now, I'm not saying the guy wasn't stupid, but the prosecutor of the case stated the following: individually, the facts make it look like he was guilty of murder, but when the facts are pieced together, the facts looked like an accidental overdose.

      That was about 30 years ago. He was found guilty of murder and (if I recall correctly) served five years in prison. So was he really innocent? What happened? Why was he found guilty if he was innocent? I don't know. I do know that prosecutors are quite happy throwing people in jail in the U.S. today. See the drug war stats for that one. I also believe that prosecutors are quite happy to throw someone in jail just to help their careers. There seems to be stories popping up all over these days where innocent people are going to jail. Google "innocent people who have been put to death". If this can happen in the States, the post office story can happen in Britain.

      Now, you make a very astute point. Nowhere in the article does it say where this missing money went. That is a very interesting point to me. You'd think it would be trivial for a reporter to find this out. From my perch, that means it can go any which way, because I don't trust government (in any country), I don't trust people and I certainly don't trust the media. This article leaves way too many questions.

    5. Re:In related news... by anagama · · Score: 1

      Tuttle or Buttle?

      Why worry about bugs? The government will give you a refund!

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    6. Re:In related news... by anagama · · Score: 1

      Ummm ... second link in TFS. This one here:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23233573

      Look at the caption under the "Post Office" picture. It reads:

      The Post Office previously said it had "absolute confidence" in its branch accounting

      also this from the body:

      "The review underlines our cause for confidence in the overall system."

      I suggest you try ctrl-f or cmd-f (looks like a clover on a mac keyboard) before doing the citation rant.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    7. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess: you work for one of those leeching corporate welfare IT firms?

      A program can easily make money "disappear": it can report takings greater than actually occurred. It could duplicate transactions which it thinks weren't committed properly, or post a transaction to the wrong post office, or fuck just have a bunch of fields initialised partly from a previous sale to post an entirely bogus transaction. Then, when the money's counted, it'll look like someone's nicked it. And the reconciliation will work. (Paper trail? Oh the reason there are no paper receipts is because the subpostmaster destroyed them - she's a thief, of course!)

      Or maybe the sub-postmaster has securely delivered some cash back to HO, and entered the details in the system, but hitting "Confirm arrival" on the other end causes the record of the money's arrival to disappear in specific circumstances. Hell, maybe someone's known about the bugs for ages and takes advantage of them.

      Never EVER underestimate the incompetence of all aspects of government outsourcing, especially where IT is involved. Along with a refusal to adjust pensionable age in line with increased life expectancy, privatisation of social housing stock, and "tax credits" (state subsidy of employers' wage bill), PPP is a primary reason for chronic overspend in the UK. There is nothing more bloated and inefficient than outsourcing a natural monopoly to private enterprise.

    8. Re:In related news... by stenvar · · Score: 1
    9. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buttle, or Tuttle?

    10. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do think you conveniently forget the Bankster criminals in London and New York. They are propgating the idea "he who has money is right and to be respected". Regardless of how that person acquired that money, as long as there is a "proper-looking" paper trail.

      If you Anglosaxons don't get a firm handle on these people, very dark times are ahead for you. For the time being, the rational and strong Chinese government has averted total destruction of the world economic system with their massive reserves and smart policy. And by making it clear that Banksters will be shot, if required.

      You better adopt the same policies or face a tyranny which makes China look like a kindergarten. Start with ridding yourself of your PM. He has been sent by the banksters so that they can suck the last drop of blood out of Britain.

    11. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why worry about proper software engineering, testing and proper training ? This is Britain and the justice system will take care of those whom the software claims to have embezzled 10000 pounds.

    12. Re:In related news... by Spottywot · · Score: 2

      Now, you make a very astute point. Nowhere in the article does it say where this missing money went. That is a very interesting point to me. You'd think it would be trivial for a reporter to find this out. From my perch, that means it can go any which way, because I don't trust government (in any country), I don't trust people and I certainly don't trust the media. This article leaves way too many questions.

      I think that after prosecuting the poor victims they will have written off any unrecoverable 'losses' and the saved themselves a good amount in tax, it would be interesting to know how many post offices have just blindly accepted this bug and just stumped up the money with no one actually realising the mistake, in which case it just goes down as pure profit for the post office. In both cases the Post Office end up winners out of this 'creative accounting'.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    13. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't a program make money disappear? intentionally it is very very easy (x=x-1; there, one less money) unintentionally the same can happen, or you could be messing up your memory handling and just lose it. there is simply a million ways this can go wrong.

    14. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >They say nothing about the severity or nature of the bugs. Did the bugs cause anyone to receive extra money? No? Just missing money? A program cannot just make money "disappear". There is still a transaction that it needs to be reconciled against.

      The bug appears that it wasn't tracking transactions correctly. No money was actually missing, but the computer showed the postmasters had handed in a different amount of money from the amount the computer said they should have. The conclusion of the PO was that the postmasters were stealing, hence them losing their jobs or being prosecuted. They'd actually handed the correct money in, but the computer said otherwise.

      Some cases will be legit, many will be down to the bug(s).

    15. Re:In related news... by horza · · Score: 2

      It was a very clever reference to the movie Brazil, where the bug was actually a bug (falling into the machine and changing "TUTTLE" to "BUTTLE")... which is a reference even further back to the very first computer "bug" and where the term first got its name. This unleashes a chain of events leading to the arrest of Buttle, with management having full confidence in their software until belatedly and begrudgingly giving restitution after the damage had already been done (much like in the article). The reference is remarkably apt.

      Though I would have thought the software where a bug could ruin lives and send people to prison was called PRISM.

      Phillip.

    16. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Here is a link to a short blurb and a picture of the first computer bug (scroll to the bottom): http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/pers-us/uspers-h/g-hoppr.htm

    17. Re:In related news... by countach · · Score: 1

      Hmm, yes surely there is some kind of an audit log. Every penny could surely be traced to where it went. A very strange story is this.

    18. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Toyota assures us that their ECU software could not possibly have failed and allowed runaway acceleration.

    19. Re:In related news... by mrbester · · Score: 1

      This has been reported for years in Private Eye. The fact that MSM has only just started (and tries to claim impartiality by stating "allegations" when there are hundreds of court cases to reference) speaks volumes.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    20. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when do bankers go in jail for their mistakes?

    21. Re:In related news... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Read the article.

      The one case it mentions where someone was actually convicted, she was not convicted because the computers said she was short. She was convicted because she told someone else the computers said she wasn't short. Since the computers were her accounting system, and she was lying about what they said, this was accounting fraud. I'd assume it's typical, and nobody (or at least very few people) has been convicted of stealing based solely on computer data.

    22. Re:In related news... by Archibald+Buttle · · Score: 1

      I think you must have me confused with somebody else. ;-)

    23. Re: In related news... by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      The bug caused the computer to say that the Sub Postmaster should have money that they didn't have.

      They receive money from selling stamps, road tax discs, passport applications and so on, and hand out money for welfare benefits payments. The difference between those two things is what they should have left in the till. If the computer records the transactions incorrectly, then it will show an incorrect end of day till balance.

  3. helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    "I got to the end of one week and I was £2,000 short so I rang the helpdesk and they told me to do various things and then it said I was £4,000 short.

    "They then said I had to pay them the £4,000 because that's what my contract says - that I would make good any losses.

    "Then while I was repaying that it jumped up to £9,000."
    System 'confidence'

    Ms Hamilton said that, by the time the figure reached £36,000, she lied to the Post Office - wrongly telling them the books were balancing just so that she could open the office the next day."

    it seems like the helpdesk did not have the power or know-how to see something is very wrong there or maybe they did see something looks off but it's not in the script. Or maybe they where near the max time per call and said said say it's balanced and I will pass this up the chain.

  4. I am just an employee by stanlyb · · Score: 0

    Sorry guys, but i bear ZERO responsibility for anything that this little program could cause. At the end of the day, i don't own the software, i don't sell it, i don't reap the benefits. All i do is just to "code" the requirements, nothing more, nothing less.

    1. Re:I am just an employee by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      All i do is just to "code" the requirements, nothing more, nothing less.

      I'm willing to bet you don't actually code to the requirements, and that your code has bugs that were not specified in the requirements. Because pretty near everyone's does.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:I am just an employee by Xest · · Score: 1

      That and if you're coding to the requirements knowing full well they're wrong then you're just as complicit regardless.

      Whenever I've been given a spec that I know is wrong I get it changed, change it myself, or go over the spec writers head if they wont budge and send an e-mail to the highest levels along the lines of "This has x issue. Do you still want me to implement this? Note that if I do go ahead and do it anyway I am not willing to take any responsibility for faults that affect us or the client", then if it does come back to you just print out the e-mail and hold it up to their face. Thankfully nowadays I'm normally the one writing the spec, but there's no "I'm just doing what I'm told" excuse, if you know it's wrong get it fucking changed, if you don't, you're still just as much at fault.

      What's the worst they can do? fire you? The software development industry only has an unemployment rate of about 2% - 3% and has largely been recession proof (because even when cuts have been made, other firms have been ramping up automation requiring more developers more than filling the gap). If you're not in the bottom 2% - 3% you can trivially just go work elsewhere.

      Either way there's no legitimate reason to just go ahead and implement bad software.

    3. Re: I am just an employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. I did just get fired for precisely this offense - and now have 2 offers for jobs paying 3x my former salary to choose between. The fact of the matter is that a good attorney could very easily pin the blame on an individual developer just following spec, especially if it can be proven he was aware of the issues - and never underestimate the reach of a good subpoena'd discovery process.

  5. sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that with the real IT guys far from the real issues.

    1. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by jrumney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is outsourcing. The sub-postmasters who are being charged with fraudulent accounting over the results of these bugs are mostly former Royal Mail employees who were sacked and hired back as independent retailers contracted to provide postal services with contracts that transferred all the risk onto the small retailer providing the service.

    2. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      talking about the IT outsourcing as well.

    3. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The sub-postmasters who are being charged with fraudulent accounting over the results of these bugs are mostly former Royal Mail employees who were sacked and hired back as independent retailers

      ...

      Okay, so what they're saying is they fucked over the employees by taking away all their benefits and cutting their wages, they underfunded a software project that performed an apparently mission-critical function... and then fucked them over again when (surprise!) it didn't live up to the absurd demands of management.

      Incompetence on this level by the government -- punishing the soldiers instead of the generals, has already lead to the failure of one major world economy whose various bureaucratic deitrius was "too big to fail", and I see Britain has failed to learn anything from the cluster fuck that is the remains of the US economy.

      Well, British citizens... speaking as someone from the miserable colonies; It'll be nice to have some company.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The Royal Mail is a private company, not government run. Naturally they went with the lowest bidder and tried out externalise all their risks and costs. That's how capitalism works.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how the Third Reich came into being. Enjoy your LEADER/Führer Cromwell !

    6. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Mail

      Royal Mail Holdings is a public limited company in which the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills owns 50,004 ordinary shares plus 1 special share, and the Treasury Solicitor holds 1 ordinary share.

      Historically, the General Post Office was a government department which included the Royal Mail delivery business, represented in Her Majesty's Government by the Postmaster General, a Cabinet-level post. It became a statutory corporation known as the Post Office in 1969. Most of the duties were passed to Consignia plc, a public limited company wholly owned by Her Majesty's Government, in November 2001[3] and the dormant Post Office Corporation was dissolved in 2007. Consignia changed to Consignia Holdings plc, then Royal Mail Holdings plc, the current name.

      Royal Mail was not privatised in the 1980s or 1990s, and currently remains a state-owned company. However the Postal Services Act 2011 enables the government to privatise up to 90% of Royal Mail, with 10% being held by Royal Mail employees.[5][6] The first sale of shares is expected in late 2013 or early 2014.[7] The Act makes provision for Post Office Ltd. to continue to be owned by the Crown or a mutual ownership structure.

    7. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not quite true, Royal Mail Group is currently owned by the goverment but run as a company with a monopoly. This was done to make Royal Mail easy to privatise. I used to work for Business Systems, RMG's internal IT department. When we were outsourced to CSC quality & reliability were sacrificed to cost savings and offshoring. Some of the offshore workers were fantastic, hard working and creative problem solvers (mainly the women). Others were not so good, and were unable to think outside the box and did not put in the effort. Unfortunatly, being offshore there was a large gap between their understanding of the business and ours. I don't think this is a CSC supported application but I can understand why their was not the process understanding to find these bugs.

      Finally we are actually talking about a Post Office LTD (who do retail) system not Royal Mail one, POL is again run as a seperate company from RMG (who actually deliver the mail and deal with wholesale).

    8. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Okay, so what they're saying is they fucked over the employees by taking away all their benefits and cutting their wages, they underfunded a software project that performed an apparently mission-critical function... and then fucked them over again when (surprise!) it didn't live up to the absurd demands of management.

      So, I take it the Postal Service is a government-enforced monopoly with no competitive pressures in the UK too?

      Incompetence on this level by the government -- punishing the soldiers instead of the generals, has already lead to the failure of one major world economy whose various bureaucratic deitrius was "too big to fail", and I see Britain has failed to learn anything from the cluster fuck that is the remains of the US economy.

      Damn, I thought you were going for 'Soviet Union'. :sigh:

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    9. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sub-postmasters who are being charged with fraudulent accounting over the results of these bugs are mostly former Royal Mail employees who were sacked and hired back as independent retailers

      ...

      Okay, so what they're saying is they fucked over the employees by taking away all their benefits and cutting their wages, they underfunded a software project that performed an apparently mission-critical function... and then fucked them over again when (surprise!) it didn't live up to the absurd demands of management.

      Incompetence on this level by the government...

      Oops! Gotta stop you right there and take a moment to relish the irony...

      The Post Office was one of the 'Great Tory Privatisation Plans' - it's a company that was this incompetent. It is true that it required Government incompetence first in order to even consider privatising such a vital public service - but I doubt that was the point you were hoping to make with your little rant.

    10. Re:sounds like outsourcing or PHBs saying that by stoatwblr · · Score: 1
      "So, I take it the Postal Service is a government-enforced monopoly with no competitive pressures in the UK too?"

      Not for much longer. The market is in the process of being completely deregulated down to letter level.

      That's Royalmail though. The Post Office is a commercially run franchising operation which acts as an agency for a number of goverenment deprtments and other companies. Need to pay your gas bill in cash? Take it to the post office. Collect your pension? Go to the post office. etc etc.

      There's thousands of times as much money involved handling this stuff as there is merely processing the few letters and parcels posted privately these days.

      BTW these robust denials of problems when TV documentary teams expose them are normal liability-limiting bluff. People will be exonerated, freed and compensation paid. The spokesman will be quietly thrown in fron of a bus.

  6. Fly In The Works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least they didn't have to pay for their own interrogation.

  7. not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1, Interesting

    not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS

    FedEx package after the FedEx delivery driver had a neighbor I didn’t know in my building in [redacted] sign for a package from Apple.

    and then make the driver be on the hook for it even when they don't have all day to wait and it common to give stuff / leave stuff to neighbor or drop it your door when you are not home.

    http://consumerist.com/2011/08/19/report-your-iphone-stolen-get-a-visit-from-the-fedex-thugs/

    1. Re:not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What can brown do for you?

    2. Re:not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      When you're not home and they require a signature, they're supposed to take it back, not sign it over to the nearest neighbor.

    3. Re:not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and in the case of fedex maybe not get payed some drivers are paid pre package + they have to rent / buy the truck and buy or rent the route as well also need to buy the singing pad / software and uniforms.

    4. Re:not when you are a 1099 fedex does the same BS by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Then they're liable for fucking up. Their job is to deliver a package to a specific destination, not to deliver it anywhere that's convenient for them.

      Even if they didn't get paid for nondelivery due to nobody being home, there's a reasonable number of packages you can expect to be returned to the warehouse every day. As a contractor you should be expecting that outcome for some packages and not violate your contract by delivering to a destination of your choice.

  8. Sounds like a nightmare by HuguesT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So these employees were forced to use the UK PO accounting software, which had bugs, and which showed in some instances imaginary shortfalls that they had to repay with no way of defending themselves. Sounds peachy! I hope some judge throws the book at the UK post office and finds some way to redress the situation.

    1. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lady in the redress moves for nationalisation (after confiscating all profits made through privatisation).
      The Post is the most fundamental of civil organs.

    2. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by crutchy · · Score: 0

      The Post is the most fundamental of civil organs.

      a big fat cock fucking everything under it

    3. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you would have thought that maybe someone would have, i don't know, checked the damn records before putting people in jail !
      Gee !!

    4. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by lxs · · Score: 1

      That's not cost effective. We need to reach our efficiency goals.

    5. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by Xest · · Score: 1

      Well about 100 of these sub-postmasters are looking at taking them to court over this so yes I suspect they'll win and win big given that people lost houses and went to jail over these bugs.

    6. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So these employees were forced to use the UK PO accounting software, which had bugs, and which showed in some instances imaginary shortfalls that they had to repay with no way of defending themselves. Sounds peachy! I hope some judge throws the book at the UK post office and finds some way to redress the situation.

      Yeah, that same kind of "error" was found in the US too. Unfortunately, when the book was attempted to be thrown, the result was what we call an IRS audit, which is now Federally sanctioned activity, and even highly encouraged based on your political affiliation.

    7. Re: Sounds like a nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it doesn't fit the Fascist narrative, but:

      1. Targeting was far broader than just "political opponents" - at this point, everything from human rights groups to open source advocates were on BOLO lists identical to that at the center of this shitstorm.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/us/politics/irs-scrutiny-went-beyond-the-political.html?ref=politics&_r=0

      2. You didn't hear about it because Darrell Issa (who is obviously completely neutral in this issue) specifically limited the scope of the investigation into whether Tea Party groups received extra scrutiny. Any other BOLO lists were explicitly put of scope - so even at the start, the ranking Congresscritter knew the actual facts showed a non-issue, but might be manipulable to present an ethical issue.
      http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/307813-irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

    8. Re:Sounds like a nightmare by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Supercuts. My wife worked there for a short period. If there was a shortage in the cash register they made the employees working there that night cover the difference. It had to be repaid immediately even though Supercuts didn't pay their paycheck for working that night until two weeks later.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  9. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by citizenr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Similar thing happened to me ~10 years ago(another EU country). National Telecom kept insisting I owed them money, when I called to see WTF is going on not so helpfuldesk assistant said he can see my payment and it cleared but system still wants moar money, he knows its a glitch and I can ignore it. A month later I get a bill for 2x what they imagined I owed them plus interest. I called again, asked for name of helpdesk guy, asked him to check it and informed next bill comes like this I will be reporting fraud to the police with his name attached - he cleared whole thing in 10 minutes.

    Yes, this was very asshole of me, but it goes to show where is a will, there is a way.

    --
    Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  10. Try healthcare by Wolfling1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We make software for Healthcare professionals. As you can imagine, the risk footprint is pretty ugly.

    We have special testing programs that are targeted at protecting patient safety.

    We also have insurance up the wazoo (a technical term). Our PI Insurance covers us for several millions of dollars per claim, and hundreds of millions for class actions. It is our single biggest insurance expense for the entire organisation.

    I'm happy to say that in 18 years, we've never made a claim against it, and we've never been notified of any negative consequence on any patients.

  11. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

    shoddy system for shore. but there is no circumstance where telling a lie about the books being balanced is an acceptable response in this scenario no matter how painful the system or process is, It just makes the problem 10 times worse.

  12. Send the manager to jail by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

    Maybe that'll encourage other CEO/CFO... to hire competent developers at the right (accurate/higher) salary. Due to the apparent easiness of the www languages (html,css,js,php) many people coming from various horizons proclaim themselves "developer", then offering their "talent" at a lower price.

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    1. Re:Send the manager to jail by Rob_Bryerton · · Score: 1

      many people coming from various horizons proclaim themselves "developer"

      Sort of like programmers or developers referring to themselves as engineers, eh?

  13. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Pretty much being an asshole to helpdesk people is the only way to get results. Most of those guys are just trying to get you to go away in 10 minutes or less so they can make their call stats for the week. Back in the day you might occasionally get someone who knew what they were doing, but that was back before the outsourcing craze pretty much guaranteed you were talking to a guy in a call center that also serves as helpdesk support for Hoover vacuum cleaners. He probably doesn't know that much about vacuum cleaners, either.

    So this defines your relationship with that poor bastard. You have some broke-ass shit that needs fixing, and he is there to make you try to give up and fix your shit yourself. Now you could attempt to do that, and most of the time you're some wanker who just needs his hand held while he RTFMs. But sometimes you legitimately have some shit that needs fixing. If you KNOW you're a person who needs actual help and you KNOW about your relationship with aforementioned poor bastard, your only choice, really, is to beat that guy like he owes you money. I suppose alternately you could attempt to explain all this to him, but that would take a good bit longer and he really does have call stats he needs to make.

    It would be nice if the process could work in such a way that you didn't HAVE to be an asshole to someone, but I guess that's just the way the world works.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  14. Private Eye / Nick Wallis's article by alanw · · Score: 5, Informative

    Private Eye, a fortnightly UK satirical and news magazine first raised this issue
    almost two years ago. Here's a link to the journalist's blog article.

    1. Re:Private Eye / Nick Wallis's article by jrumney · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interesting comment at the bottom of the article that might throw some light on where at least some of the money is going. Mobile phone topups are apparently showing up as declined at POS (which should cause the retailer to not take any payment from the customer), while some time later the customer gets an SMS informing them that their account has been topped up.

    2. Re:Private Eye / Nick Wallis's article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am constantly amazed at Private Eye's coverage of issues months and (like this) years before they hit the mainstream, and then Private Eye gets zero credit in the belated "Exclusive!" frontpage articles. They did the same with Starbucks, Google et al. And Mr Savile. And Mr Charles Napier (both of them).

  15. They used the wrong EULA by andy_t_roo · · Score: 1

    sounds like they should've used the windows 7 eula (section 25): LIMITATION ON AND EXCLUSION OF DAMAGES. Except for any refund the manufacturer or installer may provide, you cannot recover any other damages... This limitation applies ... even if ... Microsoft knew or should have known about the possibility of the damages.

    1. Re:They used the wrong EULA by crutchy · · Score: 0

      eulas may protect microsoft from criminal liability, but only their team of lawyers can protect them from civil suits

      actually in many countries these sorts of clauses in eulas are nullified by consumer protection statutes, and you can't contract yourself out of statute law no matter what the contract wording is or how it was agreed to

  16. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, this was very asshole of me, but it goes to show where is a will, there is a way.

    In what way were you being an asshole? Someone (or something) was trying to defraud you, and you stood your ground and made them (or it) stop. That's not being an asshole; that's merely being responsible.

  17. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem, I think, is that there weren't any books per se to begin with: Everything is tabulated with a computer, and the computer is wrong.

    And when the computer is off by tens of thousands of pounds/dollars/whatever: OMFG.

    But lying? No. Telling the truth is good, especially when it comes to official money. "I don't know what's happening because we're off by a huge amount of money, far more than we could ever accomplish in a day's business" is a good starting point.

    (Just because the books are already cooked by some outside force, does not mean that one must continue to cook them.)

  18. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    there is no circumstance where telling a lie about the books being balanced is an acceptable response

    It was a good response if she was trying to cover up her theft of 36,000 pounds.

  19. Similar issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I use some healthcare software that frequently drops drug prescriptions or swaps people's names on the top of clinical letters. I've complained and complained to the helpdesk but it's simply never acknowledged. Hasn't happened yet but if anyone comes to harm, it'll be me who is held to blame.

    1. Re:Similar issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not take the issue up with whoever is in the deciding role of software-purchases? (be it IT-dep., manager or even government deps.) Whoever requires you to use the software should be notified, and you should make sure that if the turd lands on your desk someday, you have already arranged for it to be passed on (internal email, esp. if required to be stored, is a good way to do this - and keep your own copies) if you have informed your boss about the issues and you are still required to work with the system it is pretty much out of your hands (I would not say cause for resigning in this case, but in more extreme issues that might be the way to go, and if the software is used a lot in the industry, perhaps a little media-attention (like this case is getting) would be a good way to shake the three)

    2. Re:Similar issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was witness to a similar and worrying incident when I was in hospital a few years back. One of the other patients needed two units of blood, and so this was duly delivered to the ward. The only problem was that when the nurse checked the details on the blood bags, the human readable printed name and blood type didn't match that given by the computer from the barcode label (blood type and patient name and gender differed). The nurse refused to use the blood, and took it to the senior nurse to double check what should be done.

      The whole ward then heard as an increasingly annoyed senior nurse pointed out to the hospital blood unit that there was absolutely no way that they would use the blood, and that they needed a replacement two units. The worrying thing was that it was obvious from the call that the blood unit didn't feel that there was any problem in using the blood as supplied.

    3. Re:Similar issues by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      You should either change jobs, or make some sort of an official statement about the issues. I wouldn't want to be on the hook for a serious health mixup, with some strangers deciding your fate and having the technicality of the law behind them.

  20. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    In what way were you being an asshole?

    Because it was just some poor guy at the help desk, who is getting paid $10 an hour (if he's lucky), and doesn't need someone to sue him for fraud to make his day worse. It's not his fault, and now he's making threats at him.

    I'm not saying he did the wrong thing, just that the guy at the help desk didn't deserve the treatment he got.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  21. Actually by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I build every day directly relates to the stats and commission of a large number of people. The problem is I'm given flawed methodology from the outset by the managers and above of these people. They basically do not have the analytical or even basic math skills required to be writing the requirements they are in charge of. When I point out all the problems with how they want to approach what we're doing, all I get in return is talk of scope creep and lines like "you're trying to fix today's problems when what we need done is the design for tomorrows system!" which I'm assuming they got out of a book or trade magazine because I hear it repeated enough. None of it really matters when they're doing something as idiotic as dividing every month by 30 to get a daily average.
    "well most months are 30 days"
    No, most months have 31... what about holidays and weekends?
    "See? It all averages out!"
    You and I have entirely different definitions of "average" and... whatever, I've written all my objections into the design requirements, please sign off that you're ignoring my warnings, thanks.
    "Done!"
    Again, your peoples numbers will be completely wrong...

    1. Re:Actually by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Again, your peoples numbers will be completely wrong...

      Did we learn nothing from Superman III?

      The difference between the commission they're supposed to get and the commission the bosses signed off on goes into the "Information Systems Mainteance and Training Fund". They'll sign off on that too, just put it in the requirements. Oh, and send me a postcard from Tahiti!

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Actually by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      They basically do not have the analytical or even basic math skills required to be writing the requirements they are in charge of

      This is common, in fact, typical. If writing software were easy, they could do it themselves. Typically, it is far easier for you (the designer) to become proficient (at least to the novice level) in what the customer does than it is for them to become proficient enough in software development to make sensible design decisions themselves.

      Where projects become total disasters is when neither happens. Following a "process" cannot substitute for actually knowing what you are doing.

      There is one other thing in there that bugs me: the phrase "Design Requirements". Requirements should not be specifying how things get done, only what it is that will get done. If design is laid out in your requirements, you are definitely doing it wrong.

  22. want to be called engineers, dont want licensing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Real Engineers have to get licensed by various bodies to ensure they Know What They Are Doing And Give A Shit.

    When Engineers do horrible deisgns, sometimes they are even held to some kind of standard for their failure.

    Contrast with computer programming. Every web douche wants to be called a 'software engineer' but god forbid anyone try to regulate them. Instead of actual professional licensing, that deals with reliability and quality of work, knowledge, etc, instead we get "MSCE" or other pseudo marketing garbage that means nothing.

  23. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    *ahem*

    The poor guy at the help desk: Was he, or was he not representing the company?

  24. Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by VortexCortex · · Score: 0

    but how many of us consider the potential for bugs in ordinary software to adversely affect those that use it?"

    What the hell man, have you ever installed or released software? What kind of literally retarded question is this?

    MIT License

    THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
    IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
    FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
    AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
    LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
    OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
    THE SOFTWARE.

    BSD

    THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

    GPL

    This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
    but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
    MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
    GNU General Public License for more details.

    No, really. Are you an idiot, or do you just play one on the Internet? For fuck's sake man, there are even disclaimers that state the software can't be used in nuclear power facilities. Living under the rock wasn't good enough for you, so you made some glasses out of stone and entered the real world?! Are you Kidding Me? Even JOKE licenses have indemnity clauses. The truth of the matter is this: Writing perfect software is possible, I have created perfect driver software in assembly that handled EVERY possible input EXACTLY as they should -- computers have finite state, so it's very doable. However, that shit is expensive as hell. Furthermore, even when I knew my software was PERFECT I still used an indemnity clause. Why? Because unless you're willing to guarantee me that the RAM and CPU and all other Hardware that my software touches is operating PERFECTLY at all times, physically audited by ME or my agents whenever I want to, perhaps even tearing a machine apart down to the microchip level, and peeling away the silicone level by level to ensure your circuits are NOT haywire and ensure you're not lying, then I can't EVER be absolutely sure what "my software" will do.

    If you can't assume the responsibility for the operation of the machines and systems YOU are responsible for operating, including the testing and verification of the software in and beyond the hardware's operating environment, then YOU DO NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO USE MY SOFTWARE.

  25. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by adolf · · Score: 1

    [Yes, this is a trick question.]

  26. "Ordinary" software? by kav2k · · Score: 1

    You definitely can't call accounting software "ordinary", at least not in terms of risks.
    It operates in an area with high legal risks for its users in case of an error, and it's not a revelation for the developers of said class of software.

  27. The problem is trust by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They have misplaced trust in their computer system.

    And misplaced lack of trust in human beings.

    Accounting shortfall should not mean someone goes to jail.

    It should mean a thorough investigation is launched, and the tool that first reported the shortfall should not be assumed to hold accurate information.

    1. Re:The problem is trust by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I suspect the main result of this is going to be that nobody will want to be a sub-postmaster anymore. If you risk going to jail for other people's bugs, I doubt the risk is worth the extra revenue.

      How it's even possible that someone goes to jail before a thorough investigation is another big mystery. I guess not only does the Post Office trust their buggy software too much, but the judge take the Post Office at their word.

    2. Re:The problem is trust by N1AK · · Score: 1

      It's a risk in any job where you have responsibility for money in this day and age. Hopefully what this will highlight is that you need to follow procedures and document transactions because if/when the system fucks up it will be your ability to put together 'the real truth' from the records that will keep you out of jail. A finance system can say you stole £100,000 yesterday, but if you can show categorically that the money was never there to steal you're safe; if your records are incomplete then it'll be taken as evidence against you.

    3. Re:The problem is trust by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Apparently you don't go to jail for the shortfall. You just have to make it up out of your own personal money.

      God help you if you lie about the shortfall to your boss, because you know it's not real.

    4. Re:The problem is trust by PurplePhase · · Score: 1

      This. Mod parent through the roof!

    5. Re:The problem is trust by mysidia · · Score: 1

      How it's even possible that someone goes to jail before a thorough investigation is another big mystery.

      Apparently in the modern world of financial accounting; here are the numbers the software says, passes for a "thorough investigation"

      If they say something's wrong -- then guilty until proven innocent.

      Any discrepancy you cannot explain must be the result of a theft or intentional fraud.

      Go to jail automatically, or be forced to pay the difference, unless you can prove it's not.

    6. Re:The problem is trust by mysidia · · Score: 1

      if your records are incomplete then it'll be taken as evidence against you.

      Incomplete records can incompetence or human error, not necessarily theft. There is also nothing to say that a human error or inadvertent negligence does not cause the records to be incomplete at the same time as there is a computer error.

      Even if that could only be expected to happen 5% of the time; it is still a very real possibility, and one that cannot reasonably be dismissed.

      Of course if it was theft, the thief (whoever that was) might also have been able to arrange destruction or damage to the records, also.

      In that case, the thief could be some random cashier, not the subpostmaster.

  28. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "peeling away the silicone level by level to ensure your circuits are NOT haywire"

    Silicone computer circuits?

  29. The summary isn't very good by FuzzNugget · · Score: 5, Informative

    To resummarize:

    Sub-postmasters, for those who aren't aware, are private subcontractors of the UK postal system. They are not directly employed by the government, they operate as private businesses.

    The UK requires them to use specific software, called Horizon, to manage all transactions and accounting.

    This software had a pretty serious bug that resulted in wrongly calculated shortfalls into the thousands of pounds. Their contracts, however, stipulate that they must make up for shortfalls themselves. Doesn't matter if the software is wrong, that's what it says, that's what it is (sounds like government to me...)

    This bug went unfixed for years, despite numerous complaints and reports.

    Some postmasters started falsely reporting the shortfalls as the obviously miscalculated numbers climbed to ridiculous amounts (tens of thousands) that would put them out of business by the end of the day. Because falsely reporting accounting numbers is illegal (even though the "right" numbers are obviously wrong and completely not the postmasters' fault), some of them were sentenced to prison, most likely due to the strict, unwavering and unreasoning nature of law.

    Basically, they were users self-correcting for what they knew was a flaw in the software they were forced to use, and they went to jail for it or otherwise paid dearly. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. All in all, a pretty deplorable miscarriage of justice.

    1. Re:The summary isn't very good by newcastlejon · · Score: 4, Informative

      To resummarize:

      Sub-postmasters, for those who aren't aware, are private subcontractors of the UK postal system. They are not directly employed by the government, they operate as private businesses.

      The UK requires them to use specific software, called Horizon, to manage all transactions and accounting.

      The Post Office is not state-owned.

      FYI, the postal system in the UK was formally owned and operated by the state, but was split back in 1986 into Post Office Ltd and Royal Mail; the former was privatised. The Post Office operate the physical branches as well as selling some minor banking and telephony* services while RM, which is state-owned, deal with the actual delivery of mail. FWIW parts of my line of work would be much easier if the government actually did run the post offices.

      *To make things more confusing, the old GPO also ran the telephones but that part was spun off into British Telecom long ago. Now the new Post Office also do telephony.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    2. Re:The summary isn't very good by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      "The only winning move is not to play."

      Their power is en masse - if they all tender their resignation letters on the same day for the same reason, it's likely to get the required attention and possibly they would not have to stay out of the position if the situation is dealt with.

      But, really, is the job market over there so bad that they're willing to stay in a job that will either bankrupt them or see them in prison?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:The summary isn't very good by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      If it were me, I'd try to claim that I was actually truthfully reporting my accounting numbers, and it is the software (and by extension the authors thereof) who are guilty of trying to falsely report accounting numbers.

    4. Re:The summary isn't very good by sribe · · Score: 1

      If it were me, I'd try to claim that I was actually truthfully reporting my accounting numbers, and it is the software (and by extension the authors thereof) who are guilty of trying to falsely report accounting numbers.

      Absolutely. And given that the bugs had been reported for a long time, and gone unfixed, the insistence that its numbers were accurate and its reported shortfall must be paid should be treated as fraud.

    5. Re:The summary isn't very good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These people were running sub-post offices as part of their own business under contract from Post Office Ltd, you can't just resign when running your own shop, if you close it you risk going bankrupt in any case.

    6. Re:The summary isn't very good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, thanks again Marge.

    7. Re:The summary isn't very good by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      "The only winning move is not to play."

      An erroneous conclusion. Not playing may be the only sure way to avoid either a loss or a tie, but does not result in a win.

    8. Re:The summary isn't very good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To resummarize:

      Sub-postmasters, for those who aren't aware, are private subcontractors of the UK postal system. They are not directly employed by the government, they operate as private businesses.

      The UK requires them to use specific software, called Horizon, to manage all transactions and accounting.

      This software had a pretty serious bug that resulted in wrongly calculated shortfalls into the thousands of pounds. Their contracts, however, stipulate that they must make up for shortfalls themselves. Doesn't matter if the software is wrong, that's what it says, that's what it is (sounds like government to me...)

      This bug went unfixed for years, despite numerous complaints and reports.

      Some postmasters started falsely reporting the shortfalls as the obviously miscalculated numbers climbed to ridiculous amounts (tens of thousands) that would put them out of business by the end of the day. Because falsely reporting accounting numbers is illegal (even though the "right" numbers are obviously wrong and completely not the postmasters' fault), some of them were sentenced to prison, most likely due to the strict, unwavering and unreasoning nature of law.

      Basically, they were users self-correcting for what they knew was a flaw in the software they were forced to use, and they went to jail for it or otherwise paid dearly. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. All in all, a pretty deplorable miscarriage of justice.

      You are correct in your views.
      I am one of the unfortunate postmasters caught up in this nightmare. After having my business taken off me overnight, i was also subjected to having a proceeds of crime act issued on my house ! my legal team went immediately back to crown court and the judge ordered it to be lifted immediately. It was an abuse of power. and a personal nightmare for me

  30. What's the nature of the bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, every program in one way or the other will retain some bugs, just like humans there ain't no perfect program. That's why the need for upgrade comes in. Except when the program is loaded by error of omission or commission with malicious bugs, and you've not categorically told us that.
    Well I know accounting means money, Maybe someone wants to pay the bills.
    All the same I hope my website doesn't have such bugs www.swaggland.com.

    Once again its the Anonymous Coward, lol are you kidding

  31. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

    shoddy system for shore. but there is no circumstance where telling a lie about the books being balanced is an acceptable response in this scenario no matter how painful the system or process is, It just makes the problem 10 times worse.

    I dunno, when your business is about to be shut down due to a computer glitch and there's nothing you can do about it... It didn't end well for her but I can certainly see why she did it. What would you do if the choice is between "lie" and "be shut down"?

  32. The system wrong? Unpossible! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "[I]t is used by around 68,000 people in more than 11,500 branches, successfully processing more than six million transactions every day."

    How can thorough investigations possibly be needed here?!? This is the postal system, don't you know!?!

    1. Re:The system wrong? Unpossible! by squizzar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that stuck in my craw as well. Obviously everyone is supposed to be all "Wooo 6 million transactions a day... they must be teh über-programmers! That system could never go wrong".

      On second thoughts I should apply for a job. On a modern CPU I'd expect to be able to do 6 million things and find time to get a few of them wrong in less than a second! Must be able to get a cushy contract with performance figures like that.

  33. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    Obviously YMMV, anecdote time, but...

    I used to work in a role where I was responsible for reconcile the finances of a bank branch every day. Basically, we relied on the computer to tally everything up correctly. If the computer reported a discrepancy, I'd spend the next hour with a print out, pencil and calculator going through every transaction line by line until I found the exact key press where the discrepancy originated (not always easy if there were multiple and overlapping discrepancies). 99% of the time (and because our banking software was pretty rock solid) it was human error, such as someone accidentally withdrawing some virtual money from the virtual till as part of a transfer, but accidentally leaving it in virtual limbo. You'd correct it and do some tedious audit paperwork.

    Long story short, it was always possible to do the day's finances manually when you needed to. I would hope, for her sake, that the Post Office employee from TFA was trying her best to manually reconcile her issues, and not just leaving it to anonymous call centre staff.

  34. Your false dichotomy by Maxmin · · Score: 2

    In the context of a court case, judges have discretion to turn over closed source to for-hire special/expert witness review and presentment to the court. So your claim of only two choices for review (OSS wins the day, vs the P.O. can refuse to do anything) is evidently meant to convince the more gullible reader into believing OSS would have made the problems experienced by Ms Hamilton & co. easier to resolve. The sub-post masters would have to sue for satisfaction either way, and hire the special witness either way.

    The Postal service (and Horizon by extension) clearly wish avoid liability in this, as do any institutions of its size. Given the soft and squishy language in announcing the report, with total avoidance of addressing specific sub-post masters' claims, they'll continue that way. But as their system is already closed source, your false dichotomy claim is most unhelpful to their plight, making you out as an opportunist.

    --
    O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    1. Re:Your false dichotomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With OSS the issue may never need to go to court. since they (anyone in the chain) can simply look (or pay someone to look) and it might have been settled right there without any costly suits. OSS will always have the same options as closed source and on occasion more (you are aware that plenty of expensive software with serious support is OSS? there is nothing in OSS that says it cannot be sold/supported exactly like closed source so any such arrangement would be _exactly_ like closed source - but with the added bonus of 2nd or 3rd party verification of the code)

    2. Re:Your false dichotomy by Maxmin · · Score: 1

      With OSS the issue may never need to go to court. since they (anyone in the chain) can simply look (or pay someone to look) and it might have been settled right there without any costly suits.

      Your optimism is so cute! In this case, the P.O. threw a blue-ribbon panel at the complainers; it's plain they've got a problem, but TFA was so vague, I can't tell if they were open to investigation and negotiated settlement.

      OSS will always have the same options as closed source and on occasion more

      Agreed; I use FOSSy SW every day, as well as proprietary. I occasionally contribute to OSS projects. I'm down, but just wanted the choices to be clear.

      you are aware that plenty of expensive software with serious support is OSS?

      I keep hearing this ... have you got some good examples?

      nothing in OSS that says it cannot be sold/supported exactly like closed source... with the added bonus of 2nd or 3rd party verification of the code

      I know -- financial incentives are like water to a software project.

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    3. Re:Your false dichotomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My optimism may be cute, but if i am wrong, then it will just go back to the closed source scenario, so nothing was lost - I was not only talking about this case but in general terms. Not every case is stonewalled or ignored by the higher-ups.

      And here is a tiny list of producs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_open-source_applications and you may notice some of company those names are not just 2 guys in a garage.

    4. Re:Your false dichotomy by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      OSS will always have the same options as closed source and on occasion more

      Not always, only sometimes.

      Example #1: It is practically impossible for example to embed the GPL'd Linux kernel into a project with a non-GPL compatible license, such as closed source license.

      Example #2: The Linux kernel can not embed direct ZFS support because GPL prevents such combination.

      Pretending OSS software is magically different and better in every way just makes you look silly. There are many licensing options and OSS is too vague a term to use the way you want to use it.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  35. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not like the suit would be against that individual employee.

    And either way, that employee could easily get out of that by simply passing the call to his boss. But in this case, it seems the guy knew what he was doing, and fixed the problem himself.

  36. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by FireFury03 · · Score: 2

    No, really. Are you an idiot, or do you just play one on the Internet? For fuck's sake man, there are even disclaimers that state the software can't be used in nuclear power facilities.

    My favorite "why we can't use Free software" argument is always "if we buy from Microsoft/IBM/whoever, there's someone to sue if it all goes wrong; if we use Free software we have to accept the liability" - a clear indication that someone's never actually read an EULA (although admittedly the limited liability clauses in EULAs may not actually be legal, but I've never heard of someone suing Microsoft when Word breaks...)

  37. Normal in accounts by Justpin · · Score: 2

    ALL of the major accounting software packages have tons of bugs in them. They just stick disclaimers in them voiding them of any responsibility. I know because I was an accountant once, I was hauled over the coals a number of times because of it, even got a disciplinary for poor performance. I quadruple checked and added things up in excel and on paper yet the numbers which came out when entered on the software didn't add up. Until I started recording my screen and demonstrated that it was the software at fault I was entering my calculations as I had worked them out on excel. I vindicated myself but the boss had the knives out for me already and used it as an excuse to sack me and outsourced everything to Pakistan as well as getting rid of his 40 other staff.

    1. Re:Normal in accounts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was an accountant once too and got disciplined.

      I can't understand it; they always said my invoices were outstanding.

  38. Re:want to be called engineers, dont want licensin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More importantly, we prostitute ourselves to the People With Money. If Money says "no time for proper testing", "no time for proper documentation", "no time for proper architecture", we cave in 99% of the time. IT people are often very, very knowledgable, but we have absolutely no spine.

    There are always "business reasons" for doing things in a half-assed way. Even when that means that other people (like Bank clerks) will go to jail for this.

    But that is just one symptom of a wholly rotten system of corrupt rule and it appears it needs a proper implosion, before anything will be fixed. The banksters have taken over government and we the people already believe in their Money Ideology. We deserve all the shit we can get from this. Disregard the computer scientist, worship the money-changer and then take all the piss you can get from the money-changer.

  39. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by jrumney · · Score: 2

    To the customer, he appears to be representing the company, but to his employer he is authorized to read the script and no more. Always ask for the guy's manager first if you need them to actually resolve a problem by doing something out of the ordinary.

  40. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you mean rhetorical.

  41. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A sort of middle-ground thing would be that the government regulates software which can get people into jail, like the system in discussion. These systems need to have proper, documented quality assurance, bullet-proof and redundant logging facilities to allow for the investigation of any "mysteries".

    Normally, any finance system is designed to allow for every single transation to be double- and triple-checked and this is especially necessary in the age of finance done by software.

    But you know what ? Some sort of people-manipulating "business person" has been fucking up all sensible measures of this kind (in order to meet an illusionary cost objective and to implement 175 stupid, useless "extra" features) and now some clerks go to jail for that. The cynicism of our rotten elite at work.

    The elite will pay back when they march into the facilities of the Fourth Empire of Rick Cromwell, the 3rd.

  42. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean rhetorical ?

  43. Re:want to be called engineers, dont want licensin by crutchy · · Score: 1

    in some countries engineers (real ones, not fake software "engineers") can go to jail if they are proven negligent, and engineering qualification requirements are becoming embedded in laws and standards

    fortunately in most cases computer programs don't kill people (the cases where they do are usually heavily regulated anyway, such as medicine and aviation) so end users have developed a kind of apathy towards computers where they have come to expect errors, especially in windows (if microsoft can't even have a product launch without a bsod then what hope has the rest of the programming fraternity got?).

    real engineers are held to a high standard because the public expects it. if buildings routinely collapsed nobody would go in them.

    programmers will only ever take responsibility when they are forced to by the public (and the legal system), and when that happens just watch how the number of software engineers goes from dime a dozen to a very expensive rarity. it takes a long time to build the credibility of a profession. doctors and other medical specialists are likely more trusted than engineers, but engineers rank fairly highly (which is why programmers like to associate themselves with engineering). programmers are no doubt more trusted than lawyers and second-hand car salesmen, but they are probably notable mainly for their impressive skills with a computer (however inconsistent and unreliable they may be), not their trustworthiness.

  44. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Pretty much being an asshole to helpdesk people is the only way to get results.

    No, it's a surefire way of being treat like an asshole.

  45. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by crutchy · · Score: 0

    how many of us consider the potential for bugs in ordinary software to adversely affect those that use it?

    MIT License

    BSD

    GPL

    programmers include these eulas so that they don't have to consider the effects or consequences of bugs in their software... eulas don't exactly impose any level of responsibility on the programmer (that's kinda the opposite of what they do actually)

    if only real engineers could have these kind of eulas on their structural computations... imagine walking into a skyscraper with a big sign like this at the entrance:

    "ENTER THIS SKYSCRAPER AT YOUR OWN RISK. SOME NUMBERS HAVE BEEN CRUNCHED TO COME UP WITH A DESIGN THAT WE THINK WILL WORK BUT WE DON'T OFFER ANY WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED THAT THIS SKYSCRAPER WILL BE FIT FOR PURPOSE, AND THE ENGINEERS WILL NOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL ETC DAMAGES. IF THIS BUILDING KILLS YOU... TOUGH SHIT."

    I have created perfect driver software in assembly that handled EVERY possible input EXACTLY as they should

    i'll bet that's the kind of half-assed confidence that the programmers of the Therac-25 had before they killed people

  46. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a system/company which is PROPERLY run, there is a way of finding out whether the software is wrong: It's callend "Inventur" here in Germany: You basically count all the physical stuff (cash, post stamps, other valuable items). Then you compare that list against the computer.

    THIS is going to discover any issues. That's how it is done on a regular basis in HONEST countries. Now, Britain is run by a bankster PM, so fuck that.

  47. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Back in the day you might occasionally get someone who knew what they were doing ...

    So it was with Australia's Telstra. A bit of perseverance would have one's complaint escalated until someone who knew what's what actually fixed the problem. Not so now.

    Telstra rang my mother and demanded she buy the new you-beaut modem, which she did. I took one look and realized 'Nope, won't work with a e-tablet'. So she took it into the shop. They saw it working on their computer so they tried it on the e-tablet. After a few minutes the check-out chick went to her manager. They agreed it wouldn't work so a recovery and refund was organized. Then mum got the bill for the modem. Mum called Telstra and tried to explain the problem. But no-one would make a decision. In their defense, my mother doesn't understand the necessity of Key Words. So she refused to pay the bill, the whole bill as punishment. When her phone was disconnected I finally called Telstra and organised the refund. Looking at mum's phone bill I noticed her off-contract modem had gone from a $30 fee to a $50 fee. So we went to Telstra and found a modem on a cheaper plan, that would work with an e-tablet (although the one-click setup software was Windows only). But mum was now on the bad customer list and couldn't get credit approval. We made other plans for internet and she cancelled her off-contract modem. The next day Telstra rings wanting to know why she had cancelled the modem service. Mum explains the situation but the help-desk refuses to make a decision. The following day the same thing happens. And again, the day after. And the rest of the week. No-one would fix the actual problem.

  48. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by adolf · · Score: 1

    you mean rhetorical.

    No, I mean trick. Though it's a trap might be an appropriate footnote.

  49. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A sort of middle-ground thing would be that the government regulates software which can get people into jail, like the system in discussion. These systems need to have proper, documented quality assurance, bullet-proof and redundant logging facilities to allow for the investigation of any "mysteries".

    OR! How about if you see a fucking bug in the software you're using that's generating discrepancies, then instead of covering for it, YOU DO YOUR FUCKING JOB, and refuse to use the piece of shit defective software until it's fixed and you can perform your duties. I do agree that governments should get involved. To facilitate this, it should be a mandatory requirement for all hardware drivers to be open source so that the software interacting with it, and the users of the hardware, can audit and fix broken shit. Give me closed source software, the specs for it, and an open platform to run it on, and I'll tell you if it's got any bugs. That means you could pay ME, or other engineers like me, to ensure the shit software you bought was working.

    Hell, just mandating a competent help desk would have fixed the TFA's issue.

  50. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is always easy to judge someone who might have been in a very pressured situation (thats a lot of money) and feeling completely helpless. esp. if you are sitting on your high horse looking down at them. I guess the poster have never made a bad decision in such a situation, but in that case they are in a seriously tiny minory. (not that lying is good, but if you are feeling your world fall apart around you, you tend to get desperate. again i can only assume the poster is one of those lucky people that have never been in a desperate situation where they simply could see no end to the trouble and whatever they did made it worse (seemingly the number increased at every attempt))

  51. Face it: Software ruins lives. by Ihlosi · · Score: 1

    Sometimes Therac-style, sometimes WoW-style ...

  52. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by wildstoo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Dude, you're Australian. You're lucky to have some pretty strong consumer protection law on the books.

    According to my Aussie friend if you have a problem with Telstra, or any other Aussie telecoms company, you contact the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and your problem will almost always get sorted quickly. He's had to call them when Telstra have dragged their feet fixing his Internet connection. After he complained to the Ombudsman, Telstra were calling HIM back and apologising, and had a team out in his neighbourhood fixing the problem the next day.

  53. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by N1AK · · Score: 1

    Are you eligible to vote in any country or any other form of election? By the false premise you're proposing you are to blame and should be treated as such, for everything that country/group does.

  54. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elevating a problem from business critical pain in the arse to a potential Jail sentence is NOT a good solution. The unpalatable and only solution is to actually be shutdown and then hold the system that caused said shutdown liable for your costs through the courts. It sucks arse but it is far better than rotting in jail because of it.

  55. At least not in my country. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can a doctor go to jail for making an error that kills the patient?
    Can a politician go to jail for making an error that impacts the whole country?

  56. nit - mandating would have changed nothing by raymorris · · Score: 1

    " Hell, just mandating a competent help desk would have fixed the TFA's issue."

    I may be nitpicking, but mandating competence wouldn't have helped at all. Having competent people would have helped.
    Most likely there are already several laws, rules , and procedures that mandate that they give the support contact to a competent company. That didn't make it happen. Where I work, a government agency, we have all kinds of rules mandating secure computing practices. Our systems are absolutely insecure. You can mandate faster than light travel and see what that gets you. Or maybe mandate that fast food workers are worth $18 / hour. That doesn't make them worth that, it just gets them laid off.

  57. Time to call people to account by Serif · · Score: 1

    Now the problem is shown to exist and has lead to serious consequences, it's time to call to account the experts that testified in court that such a problem was impossible, and similarly to call to account the managers that flatly denied there was a problem. At the very least any future announcement on a similar subject that they care to make should trigger the question if they are as certain now as they were when they pronounced on this case.

  58. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by squizzar · · Score: 2

    Good luck with that. I had to phone my car insurance company three times, the first two times I was promised a manager would call me back immediately. My tone went from polite but frustrated to full on shouting down the phone and threatening to come round and burn the place down angry at which point I was magically transferred to a manager. The first thing I said to the manager was that he was an arsehole for making it so difficult to reach him that I had to deliver such a torrent of abuse to a member of his staff in order for them to be allowed to put me through to him directly. I've also told several people I've spoken to at Spark Energy that they should look for somewhere else to work because having seen the level of incompetence they show to their customers I wouldn't want to be dependent on them for my pay.

  59. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by squizzar · · Score: 1

    In English I'd guess that would be an inventory. Which would work if they don't assume you've stolen the missing items.

  60. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    In what way were you being an asshole?

    Because it was just some poor guy at the help desk, who is getting paid $10 an hour (if he's lucky), and doesn't need someone to sue him for fraud to make his day worse. It's not his fault, and now he's making threats at him.
    I'm not saying he did the wrong thing, just that the guy at the help desk didn't deserve the treatment he got.

    of course he deserved. he was working as the henchman for the company trying to fraud the customer - he was the company contact and was getting paid for being that company contact. shitty job, but working a shitty job at a shitty company doesn't really provide moral protection from assholeness, in fact it's pretty much the opposite. add to that the fact that he _could_ fix the problem he was exactly the right person to say that what the company was doing would not stand.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  61. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is even worse than that, usually customer-facing support agents have absolutely no say in how the company handles things. so given the premise they proposed - just being part of a group (being human, being part of a country, being part of a family, debating on /., you name it) makes them responsible - they do not have to have any actual say in the matters (I will concede that we could limit it to groups you choose to join, but that is still a whole lot of responsibility)

  62. where did the money go? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    obviously the fucking computer program should have shown where the money went or what was bought with it supposedly.

    that some people were put to jail without them even being able to show actual money missing(or the services the supposed money paid for) is a pretty big fuckup from the police as well.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  63. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by deimtee · · Score: 1

    Australian Ombudsmen kick arse. They have some pretty tough powers over whoever they are monitoring, and they aren't afraid to use it.

    --
    I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
  64. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by deimtee · · Score: 1

    When he was threatened with a lawsuit the problem magically went away. Obviously, he had the power to fix it. If it took threatening him to get him to fix it, then he deserved the threat.

    --
    I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
  65. Accounting Software Bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must've been the European subsidiary of Initech..

  66. Re:Everyone. Seriously. WTF are you thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the court's job. If the software isn't 100% certified they should just throw out any evidence based on it.
    In fact, they should just in general throw out "evidence" that is not confirmed by something other than some (single!) computer program.

  67. We use the same system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Posting as AC for obvious reasons.

    Our postal authority uses the same system (Horizon is the UK post office name for the 'entire system'). The counter system runs something called WebRiposte Essential written by an Irish firm called Escher. The way the system works is that everything you do on it is written to what is effectively a journalling system that is replicated peer-to-peer. It is extremely reliable, and Escher boast about it having never lost a transaction. This journalling system is indeed very solid, it is highly fault tolerant and it works very well. The basic end-of-day reports use this (it's called the message store).

    Now Horizon may have other accounting stuff that we don't have here, so I can't say anything about that.

    Occasionally we have had a postmaster not balancing, and in the case where it gets out of hand our postal authority doesn't just go and have them prosecuted on what WebRiposte tells them, the facts are verified rather than just accepting what the computer system says. In every case so far it's turned out that there has been theft. The worst one was my next door neighbor who was a postmaster ended up in this situation. He was entirely innocent. It turns out it was one of his staff members who was actually doing the stealing, she was taken to court and successfully prosecuted - not just on the computer evidence, but other physical evidence too. However, this didn't stop my neighbor from losing his job (the sub office employs their own staff, the sub postmaster is responsible for what their staff do too and can end up paying the price). Of course at first he believed his staff member was not stealing - when you employ someone and think they are of good character, you're going to try and defend them. The consequences for him despite being entirely innocent was nearly losing everything - he has a young family and an extended period of unemployment is devastating.

  68. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. A threat to call the ombudsman will get most small balances instantly wiped with Australian companies, even when the company is in the right. The companies get billed for each incident, which is in the hundreds for some industries. And that is before it is even considered.

  69. Audit Trail (Re: Open Source...) by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 1

    Not having the audit trail should be the crime.

    Add to that the decision to prosecute without an independently verified audit trail, and the magistrates' decision to allow such prosecutions to proceed.

  70. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few years back, I forgot to cook my books and all the accountants got salmonella.

  71. Asians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or what you would call 'Indians' in the U.S.

    I wonder how many of these postmasters were of INDIAN descent?

  72. Definition of "software bug" by jc42 · · Score: 1

    ... how many of us consider the potential for bugs in ordinary software to adversely affect those that use it?"

    Isn't that what "bug" means in the software field? After all, an error in software that doesn't affect anything relevant to users rarely (if ever) gets listed as a "bug". Bug reports are always the result of software getting something wrong in a way that a user notices. If the affect were beneficial, I sorta doubt that many users would report it.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:Definition of "software bug" by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Bug reports are always the result of software getting something wrong in a way that a user notices."

      That actually is completely incorrect. Developers file bug reports all the time before a user ever even sees the product. Security bugs are an excellent example. We don't wait for the user to have his system compromised and notice it before we file a bug report on the issue.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  73. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The software is lying, the suspect is making a guess.

  74. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by dbIII · · Score: 1

    I get the idea that at such a point every choice is a bad one.

  75. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Well, Ok, it was some poor shlub at a phone. One of two things happen:

    1. He clears it.
    2. He shines on the caller, maybe saying he fixed it but doesn't (happened to me several times) or puts you on hold for the supervisor who never answers (same).

    I reject the shlub hupothesis. Oh, not the shlub part. Just that it's wrong to try to motivate. When "honey" instead of vinegar fails for the 4th time, then what?

    Also I doubt knowing the name does any good. They don't give their real ones so they can't be tracked down for the beatings they richly deserve, I mean, so insane phone ragers can't go after them.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  76. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

    You may not understand what a "sub-post-master" does.

    A sub-post-master runs a tiny little post office. The kind that doesn't have employees, or only has a couple employees. He's basically a mailman who can also sell stamps. Oh, and he's a private contractor so he can't get help from anyone in the government except the help desk. A subpostmaster simply does not have the money to hire an accounting guy full-time to go through the books every day.

  77. Somebody put those judges in jail by jopet · · Score: 1

    who obviously put more trust into a computer program without challenging its correctness than they trusted those postmasters. Obviously those judges had no idea of the subject matter and still felt comfortable to jail people.

  78. well by johnsnails · · Score: 1

    well, I would be buggered!

  79. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by sribe · · Score: 2

    No, it's a surefire way of being treat like an asshole.

    Nope, at least with Dell, being nice will get you lied to and blown off. Yelling and cursing will get your dead under-warranty equipment replaced.

  80. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So then "inventory" would prove that the "computer was right". Or it would prove that there is excess cash/post stamps etc in the shop. That would prove the computer/software wrong.

    In addition, the software must store several detailed logs of each and every important activity both at the client and the server levels. If it doesn't, that's British Incompetence(TM) and they should sue the hell out of Royal Mail.

    I fully expect the judicial establishment to take the side of the overpaid, incompetent M.B.A. mupperts who run Royal Mail, though. You need to punish the little guys so that the big criminals can cream of billions and crash the entire economy in the process. Otherweise the little guys might demand that the big crimes stop.

    But Maggie T. made the British eat beef from cows that ate cow-meat which was processed under reduced temperature. To "save costs" in the cow-cannibalism-business. That broought Britain hundreds of thousands of cows with dissolving brain ("BSE").

    But there is justice - Maggie T. herself got a brain disease and chances are she got it from the cannibal cow meat she caused herself.

    If you let Money fuck with your nation, you have to bear the consequences. You better fuck Money before it fucks you. The Chinese are doing it 100% correctly.

  81. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spongiform_encephalopathy

    All the joys of Shopkeeper Ideology !

  82. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    I'm not advocating being an asshole for no cause. I have sympathy for the poor bastard on the phone -- I've been on that side of the line. But because I've been on that side of the line, I know when he's trying to blow me off, which is ALWAYS. That guy is there to make you go away. The only way to get anything done is to escalate past him as fast as you can. And the quickest way to do that is to be angry at him. His script says if you're clearly pissed off and demand to talk to a manager, he sends you to a manager.

    Sure you're taking a big crap in the middle of a day of a guy whose life involves 6-10 people an hour taking a big crap on him, but his stats demand that he answer 6-10 calls an hour. If you really need something fixed you could argue with him for 20 minutes or you could get pissed off with him in the first three and let him get on to the next guy in line to take a crap on him. Sure you're being an asshole, but it really is best for everyone involved. You get to someone with the power to fix your thing, he gets to keep his shitty ass job for another day. Hooray!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  83. engineers have the power to tell the boss NO by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    engineers have the power to tell the boss NO on doing something that negligent and they can't say we will find someone who will do it.

    1. Re:engineers have the power to tell the boss NO by crutchy · · Score: 0

      engineers find problems all the time but they are most often in the same boat as everyone else... shut the hell up and do your job (make it even more awesome and cheaper) or get a new job. granted engineers have safer jobs than many other professions (including probably programmers), but bosses that aren't engineers often don't make the right decision even if it ends up costing the company big down the track (this is often the case with maintenance planning for large plant such as in base load electricity generation). in this day and age of consulting, engineers may be expensive but they are still out there, and stupid managers seem to be quite happy to pay three times as much in the mere hope that they might find someone else that will tell them something different (and stick it to the original engineer who had the gall to tell him he needed to spend money on something other than corporate junkets).

      fortunately many engineers also eventually find their way into management positions, and quite a few of the biggest companies are headed by engineers

      http://au.businessinsider.com/ceos-majored-in-engineering-2011-3?op=1#33-of-the-sp-500-ceos-undergraduate-degrees-are-in-engineering-and-only-11-are-in-business-administration-1

  84. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by tqk · · Score: 1

    Most of those guys are just trying to get you to go away in 10 minutes or less so they can make their call stats for the week.

    In what moronic universe is that metric what anyone wants from a Helldesk call center? It's supposed to facilitate problem solving communications between the company and its customers leading to customer satisfaction and retention. Instead, it's penny-pinching Helldesk costs and aggravating relations with customers, for what? Saving a few bucks on Helldesk salaries to the exclusion of the reason why the Helldesk exists in the first place? Management that comes up with ideas like that should be defenestrated.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  85. Brazil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mr. Archibald Buttle arrested, interrogated, and killed all because a fly got caught in the printer.

  86. Where are the transactions? by swm · · Score: 1

    I kind of don't get this.
    I know that accounting can be complex, but underneath it all there has to be transactions.
    Credits.
    Debits.
    Raw data.
    If the numbers on the screen don't look right, the first thing I want to see is the raw data.
    They do have the data somewhere, right?
    Right???

  87. Was it REALLY a bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it REALLY a bug in their accounting software, or was it an ingenious plot executed by none other than one Peter Gibbons, one Michael Bolten, and one Samir Nagaa..... whatever! I KNOW these guys used a 3.25" floppy disc to install a virus in the accounting system to put money in their bank account. Duh!??
    No idea why they didn't use a USB drive.... well they did, it was a USB (floppy) drive...strange thieves they are!

  88. Toyota is a prime example by kawabago · · Score: 1

    The control software for Toyota cars was written without any, absolutely no, consideration for occupant safety. Writing the code so the brake will override the accelerator seems like an obvious thing to do. It is such an obvious issue I can't see how a whole team of technology experts writing the code couldn't see it. "It's not my job." is probably the reason. Some idiot wrote the specification for the software but he/she wasn't a programmer so she wouldn't know how simple it would be to have the brake override the accelerator. She didn't put it in the design specification so the programmers didn't code it because it's not their job to think of things like that.

  89. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You seem to be under the impression that voting actually matters, or that we have as much a choice in our government as we do in our employers.

  90. Another set of court cases by alanw · · Score: 1

    where a large financial institution insisted its systems were bug free and secure,
    eventually to be proved wrong:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/21/phantoms_and_rogues/print.html
    ... at that time the computing department of one of the banks issuing ATM cards had "gone rogue", cracking PINs and taking money from customers' accounts with abandon ... more than 2,000 people who had suffered "phantom withdrawals" from their bank accounts

  91. WTF Open Source... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where did you get the idea that the Horizon Computer System mentioned in the article was open source?

    I checked four articles and could not find anything about it being open source.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23233573
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/09/post_office_admits_false_accusations_after_computer_system_cockup/
    http://www.dailytech.com/UK+Post+Office+Software+Bugs+Likely+Created+False+Financial+Shortfalls+Imprisonment/article31924c.htm
    http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240187566/Post-Office-Horizon-system-investigation-reveals-concerns

    Was your post in reply to something that has been modded down, or are you just using the opportunity to forward the FUD agenda?

  92. DNA Evidence by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of idiot jury reactions to DNA evidence: ITS A MATCH SO GUILTY, ignoring the real chance of contamination, half-assed analysis, and straight up framing by cops and DAs switching / adding a 'match' to the evidence.

    So these dim bulbs are similar: COMPUTER SAY, SO GUILTY.

    Idiocracy; fully-formed and writ large upon society's tombstone.

  93. ex Post Office supervisor here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Post Office was the only one in our Scottish town. The manager was scrupulously honest, very old school. She's been there for years, and knew most of her customers by name. She did a superb job. Then one day in 2010 auditors arrived, unannounced, shut the Post Office down, and sent the manager home. We were never told exactly what happened, but piecing together the clues it seems the software suggested money was missing. They went through the books with a fine tooth comb but never found anything against her. Somehow she got through her year of hell and last I saw of her she had a cleaning job.

    So they basically ruined her life.

    Until now I always assumed that my old boss just made some minor mistakes that were blown out of proportion. But she could well have been just another victim of the bug.

  94. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then he should quit, thus increasing the cost of bad software. You're accountable for your actions no matter whose orders you are following, or how poorly you are paid.

  95. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With my experience in this type of environment what probably happened was he put the guy on hold and got his manager who has more elevated privileges to execute the request. It may have seemed like the helpdesk guy did, and has the power to, fix the problem when in reality he probably needed his managers password, and probably got yelled at for requesting it.

  96. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently the help desk guy had the authority to "clear the whole thing in 10 minutes". So no, he wasn't just authorized to read the script and no more.

    Also, five bucks says the help desk guy answered the phone by saying "Thank you for calling Company X" rather than "You have reached William the Technician". If he presents himself as a representative of the company, then he either represents the company or is committing fraud.

  97. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by sjames · · Score: 1

    I have to say, an accounting system that can't decide if the balance due is 2000 or 4000 is automatically broken and cannot be trusted at all. The only solution is to run an independent transaction log through different software or manually. The software's transaction log cannot be used because it has already proven itself untrustworthy and the problem might be in the log handling.

  98. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by sjames · · Score: 1

    I'm usually up front about it. I tell them very politely in one or two lines what the problem is, and that I know it's not in the script and that SOME representative of the company is about to be yelled at in the most unpleasant manner I can imagine without giving them an excuse to hang up by swearing. Then I ask to speak with a supervisor.

  99. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by jrumney · · Score: 1

    Apparently the help desk guy had the authority to "clear the whole thing in 10 minutes"

    Or perhaps he bent the rules because he was being personally threatened at the time, and his employer disciplined him for it later.

  100. Re:helpdesk india or helpdesk must use script fail by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

    Which is a lot better than their UK versions, who are appointed from within the industries theyr' supposed to regulate and whose career paths go back inside those same industries. Can you say "regulatory capture"?