←back to thread

The Therac-25 Incident (2021)

(thedailywtf.com)
449 points lemper | 1 comments | 27 Aug 25 06:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
Tenemo ◴[27 Aug 25 12:09 UTC] No.45038555[source]▶
The full 1993 report linked in the article has an intetesting statement regarding software developer certfication in the "Lessons learned" chapter:

> Taking a couple of programming courses or programming a home computer does not qualify anyone to produce safety-critical software. Although certification of software engineers is not yet required, more events like those associated with the Therac-25 will make such certification inevitable. There is activity in Britain to specify required courses for those working on critical software. Any engineer is not automatically qualified to be a software engineer — an extensive program of study and experience is required. Safety-critical software engineering requires training and experience in addition to that required for noncritical software.

After 32 years, this didn't go the way the report's authors expected, right?

replies(2): >>45038648 #>>45040939 #
slavik81 ◴[27 Aug 25 15:21 UTC] No.45040939[source]▶
I am a licensed professional software engineer in Canada. It's been fifteen years since I first registered with my professional association, but I will probably not be renewing my license this year as it's not providing any real benefit to my career.

Two decades ago there was a lot of talk about turning software development into a structured engineering discipline, but that plan seems to have largely been abandoned.

replies(1): >>45047722 #
1. mitthrowaway2 ◴[28 Aug 25 02:37 UTC] No.45047722[source]▶
I've had some discussions with my engineering regulator in Canada. It's clear they have no idea what software engineering even is or who should be regulated or why. I tried to get them to provide some examples of what would and would not count as software engineering, but they couldn't.