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?"
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.