On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 11:18:45AM -0500, Joel Hammer wrote:
This must be the dumbest idea in a long time.
This is like holding a builder liable because someone broke into his
building by digging under the foundation or smashing a window.
DUMB.
Not dumb if the builder puts locks on doors that
I think that your story proves my point. NOBODY can be sure that software
is perfect. They sued Dow Corning out of business with pure junk science,
and they are still destroying companies over the asbestos problem.
They caused stagnation in the private aviation industry, and I believe,
drove
On Friday 18 January 2002 09:16 am, Rick Sivernell wrote :
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:54:49 +0100
snippity
for. While some foreign developers are very good, many are not. Those that
are not use their language as a hinderence in convering in US to avoid or
frustrate those who manage or use the
Joel Hammer wrote:
This must be the dumbest idea in a long time.
This is like holding a builder liable because someone broke into his
building by digging under the foundation or smashing a window.
DUMB.
I think what is needed here is to prevent software companies from
including clause in
The problem with holding software writers liable is this.
They cannot anticipate all the uses or all the hardware the software will be
aplied to.
Neither, can they predict all the ineractions with every other piece of
software aver written.
Therefore, software would come with incredible
