You’re assuming a lot.

I’m assuming your OP thinks “better safe than sorry” is stupid because it doesn’t actually help you make decisions.

I would much rather drive on a bridge of someone whose motto is “do it right.”

This isn’t the Apollo program. We know how to make safe bridges. It’s not a matter of being cautious and talking to every stakeholder. It’s a matter of hiring actual engineers,* letting them work, believing them, and then giving them the resources to monitor construction properly.

It means sometimes rejecting a lot of bad material and holding the project up for 8 months.

It does not mean “lean safe” and cross your fingers.

* meaning licensed engineers. The word engineer has I guess been made meaningless by thousands of people writing code and calling it “engineering”. It used to mean someone had completed training as an engineer.

I believe you are either arguing in bad faith, or not giving the post you are replying to enough credit.

Better safe than sorry MEANS do it right. It means that human life is more valuable than material wealth.

If you are hiring amateurs to build your bridge, or you are “crossing your fingers”, then you are not being “better safe than sorry” — in the sense that what you are doing can not be an implentation of “better safe than sorry” that can be reconciled with the broader cultural context in which people use the phrase and discuss it.

> Better safe than sorry MEANS do it right. It means that human life is more valuable than material wealth.

This is not accurate on both accounts.

First, material wealth can be converted into quality of life in multiple different ways. Consuming additional millions to push death rates down by a few percentage points is taking away from other places, ostensibly hurting others.

Second, better safe than sorry does not mean do it right. Mistakes will happen, and acting like nothing will ever go wrong is a fools errand. Planning for failure is a significant portion of project management and engineering in general. The goal is 0 mistakes, but severe negative overreactions in response to failure can have a net negative impact.

A net negative impact on whom? A net positive impact on whom? How do you quantify this impact?

> The word engineer has I guess been made meaningless by thousands of people writing code and calling it “engineering”.

A friend of mine was just hired as a project engineer at a construction company. He was confused since he has no engineering experience. Turns out, at this company, it means you are training to be a project manager.

“Do it right” is what we want, “better safe than sorry” is what we usually get. “Better safe than sorry” in practice usually ends up looking like a tool for acquiring broad agreement with stakeholders and spreading accountability. I have seen many “better safe than sorry” initiatives that result in complete garbage that loses the purpose, spirit and original intent of its mission.