←back to thread

628 points xbryanx | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.683s | source
Show context
mike_hearn ◴[] No.44531351[source]
To the NY Times: please don't say they died by suicide. The passive voice makes it sound like some act of God, something regrettable but unavoidable that just somehow happened. It's important not to sugarcoat what happened: the postmasters killed themselves because the British state was imprisoning them for crimes they didn't commit, based on evidence from a buggy financial accounting system. Don't blur the details of what happened by making it sound like a natural disaster.

Horizon is the case that should replace Therac-25 as a study in what can go wrong if software developers screw up. Therac-25 injured/killed six people, Horizon has ruined hundreds of lives and ended dozens. And the horrifying thing is, Horizon wasn't something anyone would have previously identified as safety-critical software. It was just an ordinary point-of-sale and accounting system. The suicides weren't directly caused by the software, but from an out of control justice and social system in which people blindly believed in public institutions that were actually engaged in a massive deep state cover-up.

It is reasonable to blame the suicides on the legal and political system that allowed the Post Office to act in that way, and which put such low quality people in charge. Perhaps also on the software engineer who testified repeatedly under oath that the system worked fine, even as the bug tracker filled up with cases where it didn't. But this is HN, so from a software engineering perspective what can be learned?

Some glitches were of their time and wouldn't occur these days, e.g. malfunctions in resistive touch screens that caused random clicks on POS screens to occur overnight. But most were bugs due to loss of transactionality or lack of proper auditing controls. Think message replays lacking proper idempotency, things like that. Transactions were logged that never really occurred, and when the cash was counted some appeared to be missing, so the Post Office accused the postmasters of stealing from the business. They hadn't done so, but this took place over decades, and decades ago people had more faith in institutions than they do now. And these post offices were often in small villages where the post office was the center of the community, so the false allegations against postmasters were devastating to their social and business lives.

Put simply - check your transactions! And make sure developers can't rewrite databases in prod.

replies(19): >>44531419 #>>44531429 #>>44531441 #>>44531521 #>>44531528 #>>44531663 #>>44531829 #>>44531922 #>>44531950 #>>44531986 #>>44531999 #>>44532057 #>>44532232 #>>44532622 #>>44532757 #>>44532759 #>>44533432 #>>44535081 #>>44538524 #
johnorourke ◴[] No.44531528[source]
"died by suicide" is just a modern replacement for "committed suicide", because that phrase dates back to when it was a crime, so it's regarded as making the victim look bad.
replies(4): >>44531586 #>>44531591 #>>44531641 #>>44531844 #
tjwebbnorfolk ◴[] No.44531591[source]
I say this as someone whose father killed himself when I was in 5th grade:

The "victims" who suffer after a suicide are the living, not the dead. These kinds of "modernizations" are transparent PC nonsense made up by well-intentioned do-gooders who have no idea how to represent the interests of other people who have a lived experience that they don't understand.

The person is dead either way. There's literally no way to sugarcoat this fact. We'd rather you just speak in plain, honest language than trying to make it sound less bad somehow.

replies(2): >>44531653 #>>44531683 #
CrazyStat ◴[] No.44531683[source]
What makes “committed suicide” any more plain or honest than “died by suicide”?
replies(4): >>44531754 #>>44531779 #>>44531820 #>>44534372 #
1. tjwebbnorfolk ◴[] No.44531754[source]
I don't have a big issue with that particular phrase itself. Although the passive voice is designed to conceal or obscure the actor, which doesn't accomplish anything here. Attributing a suicide to anyone other than the actor starts to appear oxymoronic very quickly. Yes life is complex and whatnot -- that's a given, we don't need a reminder every time anything happens.

But really it's the transparent and ham-handed attempts by some others to smooth over the sharp edges of reality merely by re-phrasing how things are written.

People generally don't want pity, but these re-phrasings accomplish nothing other than to make clear that one person feels sorry for another.

replies(2): >>44532051 #>>44532845 #
2. watwut ◴[] No.44532051[source]
> Although the passive voice is designed to conceal or obscure the actor, which doesn't accomplish anything here.

No, passive voice is not in general designed to conceal or obscure the actor. Especially not in the sentence here.

There were valid similar complains about crime reporting. But the language there was different. The sentence "The innocent McKay family was inadvertently affected by this enforcement operation" is trying to hide culpability. We can discuss that. These two are incomparable:

- A deputy-involved shooting occurred. (Ok, we are avoiding the actor. We do not know who was shooting.)

- A person died by Suicide. (Clear to anyone who done what.)

3. haswell ◴[] No.44532845[source]
> Attributing a suicide to anyone other than the actor starts to appear oxymoronic very quickly.

No one is an island. We’re all deeply intertwined/interconnected. We’re the sum total of our lived experiences and without a doubt some have lived far more challenging lives than others and are influenced by factors that would lead just about anyone down a dark path.

The grief felt by those left behind is the result of that aforementioned interconnectedness.

Getting back to the quoted bit, isn’t this a bit like saying “attributing grief to anyone other than the person experiencing it is oxymoronic”?

My point is not to diminish the impact on those left behind in any way. Clearly this is a traumatic event that causes excruciating grief.

But I think we also need to be honest about the environmental factors that lead to suicide. Hopelessness is one of the large causes. If there are systemic reasons causing people to feel hopeless, and if those systemic problems could theoretically be changed/improved, and such improvement lowered the suicide rate, there’s a strong case to be made that the systemic factors share the responsibility.

> Yes life is complex and whatnot -- that's a given, we don't need a reminder every time anything happens.

I don’t think it’s a given. Clearly some lives are far more complicated than others. There exists a subset of people for whom that complication will become an insurmountable problem. Often those people have been traumatized, or have never learned the tools necessary to work through their feelings.

Some people are bullied into killing themselves. Should that be attributed wholly to the person who was bullied?

replies(1): >>44537034 #
4. tjwebbnorfolk ◴[] No.44537034[source]
Yes I already said that life is complicate because I KNEW that someone would write this very comment. But reminding people that life isn't simple isn't the PSA that you believe it to be.

Yes, everything causes everything, there is no one single thing to blame. Life is hard and complicated. Every rule has exceptions. Every truth has contradictions. Every one is a hypocrite. The world is big and complex.

We all know this already. We don't need this disclaimer to every statement that anyone makes. At a certain point, it just becomes noise.