Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "Software Engineering Fu0026*K Up Behind The Passport E-gate Failure" video.

Developers who do not use formal verification for critical systems are trash developers. There are no excuses. Ignorance is not an excuse. "Hard to find competent developers" is not an excuse. This industry is teeming with the wrong people who should have never been allowed anywhere close to programming - all those self-taughts, bootcamp "graduates" and such.
1
 @PavelHenkin you could always safely distribute a hash. They were just some lousy code monkeys, they built a system on top of f-ng WiFi, obviously they never considered anything at all.
1
The pre-winter AI definitely could fix it. You know - formal proofs, SMT solvers, etc. All the stuff modern so-called "engineers" who are likely nothing but some bootcamp "graduates" know nothing about and have no mathematical background to even start comprehending.
1
Nah. There are formal methods and well established design protocols that would have highlighted all such issues on a design stage. But the developers were incompetent and should have been flipping burgers instead of being anywhere close to any real world engineering.
1
@charlesd4572 there is nothing wrong with flipping burgers - it's a decent profession, and it is far more suitable for the self-taughts and bootcamp "graduates" than engineering. There were no unknown failure points in this system. Like, in every distributed system every link can go down. Obviously. "Engineers" who fail to use formal methods to evaluate all possible failure modes (based on known individual component failures) and their consequences are not engineers and should not be allowed to design anything at all. I've been building fault-tolerant systems for decades. It really hurts to see what abominations people build when they have no engineering background. Cache is indeed the wrong solution here - and using a WiFi for anything even mildly mission-critical is an outright crime. A fail-safe design would have had multiple communication channels and a quick way of detecting the issues with them.
1
@charlesd4572 there were no unknown failure points in this case. All were pretty obvious. Yet code monkeys failed to do anything at all with them. Do not try to find excuses - there is no excuse for doing such an awful job.
1
@charlesd4572 stop trying to find excuses for bad engineering. There is no excuse. They used wifi ffs, they clearly set for failure from the very beginning.
1
@charlesd4572 of course you can. There is an entire engineering discipline doing just that. Of course there are always unknown failure modes, but you can always design a system tolerant to all the failure modes you know about in advance. Have you seen aerospace and medical designs? Even automotive?
1