Re:FAA pushes back on Boeing exemption for 787 safety flaw
by mehrdadn on Friday July 06, 2018 @04:17PM
(#17474772)
Maybe it depends on what you'd call a "bug". Even a flip-flop always has a nonzero probability of failure via metastability, but I wouldn't classify every system that uses a flip-flop as "buggy". Though to be honest now I'm not really sure what a consistent and useful definition of a "bug" is, if it's even clear and noncircular. (Maybe the best definition is "has a failure mode unaccepted by the users"? Not sure.)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:FAA pushes back on Boeing exemption for 787 safety flaw
by Senderman on Friday July 06, 2018 @04:29PM
(#17474861)
The state of "Bug" vs. "not a bug" is similarly non-binary.
"unaccepted by users" is circular in this particular discussion, because it started with trying to tease out whether a rare* safety* risk was "acceptable."
* All these debatable words tell me GuB-42's comment is taking the right approach.