

Miscomputation: Learning to live with errors - srsamarthyam
http://tomasp.net/blog/2015/failures/index.html

======
hinkley
I suspect as Moore's law runs out we will see a rise in speculative computing,
where we write our code to work off of fast estimates of slow calculations
(ie, detectable mistakes), and then double-check the work before committing
the answer at the end.

Video games already do something like this to hide latency in multi-player
scenarios. A generalized solution would be interesting, although given our
track record with shared state concurrency, it may prove too confusing for the
average dev.

------
mreiland
errors being acceptable is why the challenger disaster happened. Ok, not
really, but you get the point.

Everyone has to evaluate the _risk_ of the errors and act accordingly.

~~~
HCIdivision17
It's likely worth noting that the shuttle has a famously robust computer
system. The Challenger was related to an engineering flaw in the mechanical
design of the system.

I forget my source, but IIRC the computer system actually noticed the pressure
drop from the fuel lines (what with the exploding) and started the shutdown
process, spinning down the turbos before the system was forcefully
disassembled. Takes a while to turn off the turbos; a few hundred milliseconds
really isn't enough time...

[0] Obligatory link to the Feynman report

[http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/flyout/flyfeature_...](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/flyout/flyfeature_shuttlecomputers.html)

[1] A cool article on the software running the shuttle

[http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-
stuff](http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff)

~~~
mreiland
The flaw of the O-rings was known, but the risk was considered acceptable by
management.

This is specifically why I couched my answer in terms of risk. This was not
specifically about the computer system, this was about the mis-assessment of
risk.

~~~
philipov
So you're saying that we have a cult of unbounded precision due to our low
confidence in appropriately assessing risk?

