From the Daily Newsletter ... What if We Paid for Bugs?
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Reminds me of Knuth reward check - Wikipedia[^]
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh:
Your comment reminds me of the old joke about Corel 2000 - it was nothing to do with the millennium, just the number of programs in the package.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh:
Your comment reminds me of the old joke about Corel 2000 - it was nothing to do with the millennium, just the number of programs in the package.
Yeah, their development strategy always seemed to be "Add bugs and complicate" ... :sigh:
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry?
IMO, this would give lots of employment to the legal profession - is the client's request an enhancement or a bug report? One problem is that many software projects don't have a proper specification, so legitimate disagreements can arise about the scope of work.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry?
IMO, this would give lots of employment to the legal profession - is the client's request an enhancement or a bug report? One problem is that many software projects don't have a proper specification, so legitimate disagreements can arise about the scope of work.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
Which could lead to better specifications as well ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
If we paid hackers to find AND FIX the holes in security software it could eliminate zero day stuff. Or, they would figure out they'd be coding themselves out of a job and stop. I hate it when I follow my logic to the end.
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
-
Reminds me of Knuth reward check - Wikipedia[^]
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
I usually strong-arm users into helping test the product; so, my "bugs" are usually requirements that were not previously identified or acknowledged. I know some (office) political types want to call all omissions "bugs", but that's simply not the case.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
Reminds me of this Dilbert... Dilbert Comic Strip on 1995-11-13 | Dilbert by Scott Adams[^] That's exactly how it would work out for Devs. :laugh:
I love that. Wally finally found motivation to work.
Kelly Herald Software Developer
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Would you like to upgrade to Windows 2023 for the low low price of $11,999,999.99?
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
I'll wait for the BOGOF :)
>64 Some days the dragon wins. Suck it up.
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Being a solo developer and handling frontline support for the software I develop and sell, I'm already paying for bugs or poor design with my time. My goal is to keep the support line from ringing, or when it does, to be able to react quickly to minimize support time. After all, time == money. :)
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse "Hope is contagious"
-
Which could lead to better specifications as well ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
What if We Paid for Bugs? – George Stocker[^] It ends with
Quote:
Take this a bit further, and imagine that in our world that that state of affairs has always existed and exists now. What software would be better in this brave new world? What software would be worse?
Well ... the first thing that springs to mind is that Corel would have been bankrupt for decades. :laugh: I can see it as a good idea, myself: I strive for reliable, robust software with as few bugs as possible (none by preference, but ...) However, a heck of a lot of the source code I see seems to be assembled from a kit of parts (most of which weren't intended to do that job) and hammered together with little or no testing. Would a "pay by the problem" approach improve that? Or just scare the "easy money coder" away from the industry? What do you think?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
I'm sure I read something a while back about the archaeologists who offered to pay for each additional fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which lead the herdsmen who found them to rip up any pages they found so they could get paid for more fragments. :) And based on past experience, every new feature request or change to the specification would suddenly be classed as a "bug" by the customer.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
