Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

First, the notion that anyone could "peer-review" software for correctness is obviously absurd. See the post above: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=968727

It's hard to believe that the parent has high rating. Seriously, as science uses more and more software and computers, science is going to have to move closer to standards of reliability of the software industry as well as scientific standards of reliability. Is that not obvious?

Uh... also... the parent also distorts the linked article, which readily admits peer-review isn't a panacea ("Worse, the concept of 'peer review' is increasingly being treated in the popular discourse as synonymous with 'the findings were reproduced and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.'"). Did parent even read the original article???



standards of reliability of the software industry

Standards of reliability? Are you talking about the same software industry I'm familiar with?


Uh, the software industry may have a long way to go compared to where one might want it to be. But it has gone a ways compared to one person writing batch scripts or (the example from the article) one person writing spreadsheets.


It's also worth noting that in places where reliability is worth the massive decrease in productivity (e.g. robots on mars, avionics, etc.) tools like formal verification and multiple implementations for verification of behavior are used.


Those are situations where scientists hire professionals to do the programming, so that supports joe_the_users's point.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: