Live data from Hacker News

UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

theguardian.com

271–280 of 291 posts

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#271
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of "normal" people like the idea of holding corporates accountable but how would that actually work? The CEO blames one of their directors; the Director blames the supplier; the supplier blames the requirements documentation; the Business Analysts blame the culture for creating confusing and conflicting requirements. Yes, you can hold the organisation accountable but then the people who worked there bac…

The quick and dirty way is to somehow tie their power/privileges/financial-situation to that of those who they have power over. (And make it stick for many years.) There's a big missing culture of fixing problems in corporations. Which of course must start with acknowledging the problem. Which of course means that people reporting problems shouldn't face negative consequences. Which means that the current cultural ga…

one thing that ive noticed/realized is that perhaps associating hierarchy with division of labor/responsibility is perhaps an anti-pattern...

what if the ceo was responsible, but was working under the managers "for them" what if managers worked at the same level as thier team whos role is to make the team productive and support them (or even the team could fire thier manager) etc etc

i wonder if disassociating those two (responsiiblity/hierarchy) might be a step towards fixing these kinds of issues...

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All sorts of police field tests have significant rates of false positives. People actually get arrested on the basis of such "evidence" all the time. The justice and law enforcement systems essentially operate on the notion that these things are "good enough".

I've just recently had a trooper make 4 "mistakes" in court and in official reports. One of which I believe was an outright lie. The system doesn't care. If this were any other witness they would be discredited, but because they are law enforcement, they get a free pass. The agencies won't even handle the complaints correctly or file this information as Guglio data for when future cases request it (if found to be unr…

> The reason they state is to uphold the integrity of, and the public trust in, the system.

Here's another dangerous idea: the justice system has false positive rates.

A judgement is a test with two possible results: innocent or guilty. Every test has false positives and false negativies. For every judge, there is a chance they'll condemn the innocent or absolve the guilty. How likely is it? We'll never know.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#273
post #43

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252496560/Fujitsu-bosses... >For the first 10 years of Horizon’s existence, transaction and account data was stored on terminals in each branch before being uploaded to a central database via ISDN. Our source says this part of the system simply did not work. >“The cash account was a piece of software that sat on the counter NT box, asleep all day,” he said. “At the end of the day,…

I think a lot of "normal" people like the idea of holding corporates accountable but how would that actually work? The CEO blames one of their directors; the Director blames the supplier; the supplier blames the requirements documentation; the Business Analysts blame the culture for creating confusing and conflicting requirements. Yes, you can hold the organisation accountable but then the people who worked there bac…

Blame lies with CEO. Unless CEO can show there was insubordination that is CEO wanted to do the right thing but director ignored CEO and ordered their reports to ignore CEOs orders.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#274
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of "normal" people like the idea of holding corporates accountable but how would that actually work? The CEO blames one of their directors; the Director blames the supplier; the supplier blames the requirements documentation; the Business Analysts blame the culture for creating confusing and conflicting requirements. Yes, you can hold the organisation accountable but then the people who worked there bac…

At some (or perhaps more than one) point there was someone who was responsible for ensuring that the system put in place complied with requirements and that it was functioning as intended. They didn't do their job. They can point their finger any which way, but that won't absolve them of dereliction of duty.

That would QA department. And QA department is not exactly the most respected department in technology. I have seen numerous times where issues raised by QA are ignored, or even worse they get code to test 1 day before the release.

The issue lies with leadership. Start with CEO for creating a culture where safety and quality is ignored. Go down the chain only if there is considerable proof that someone under them ignored corporate orders and delivered buggy software.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually there's a huge amount of self policing. Engineers are the ones at the forefront of inventing and tooling more ways to test.

Yes, and no. We have some marvelous CI/D tools at hand, but the execs are the ones that push to release before ripe, and they won't let things like auto-test failures get in the way of MVP. There was a comment here, some time ago, that was made by someone that proclaimed themselves to have started and successfully exited a number of companies. It went something like "If you do not get physically sick, looking at the…

That sounds like bad engineers. Set your CI/CD to fail to merge code if any automated tests fails. We're not talking weeks of extra work to get tests to pass.

I think that as soon as we say "zeitgeist" we're abandoning all attempts at understanding the full picture. There are huge numbers of tests being written all over the place, particularly with modern software tooling. It's the older stuff (e.g. Oracle Forms) or low code stuff (e.g. Bubble, Dynamics) that are hard to test where the biggest issues crop up, IME, as those technologies will be picked by people who don't value testing.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very sure this system was certified in a multitude of ways. No certification process would prevent this. The real issue here was that Post Office refused to recognise that, although computers themselves are mostly infallible, computer programs are never infallible. They conducted their activities and took actions based on assuming the reporting was flawless. Then the really serious problem is that in cases where…

> although computers themselves are mostly infallible What do you mean? Hardware is fallible too, just less often than software. This may cause problem on its own e. g. bit flips in non-ECC memory, HDD which lie (reply to flush cache before data is actually written) or HW can trigger software errors, e. g. HW can crash at random moment and SW can be not designed to handle this properly.

That is why I said "mostly", at least in comparison to programs or humans. Obviously yes there are very occasional problems as you've described.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#277
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quick and dirty way is to somehow tie their power/privileges/financial-situation to that of those who they have power over. (And make it stick for many years.) There's a big missing culture of fixing problems in corporations. Which of course must start with acknowledging the problem. Which of course means that people reporting problems shouldn't face negative consequences. Which means that the current cultural ga…

one thing that ive noticed/realized is that perhaps associating hierarchy with division of labor/responsibility is perhaps an anti-pattern... what if the ceo was responsible, but was working under the managers "for them" what if managers worked at the same level as thier team whos role is to make the team productive and support them (or even the team could fire thier manager) etc etc i wonder if disassociating those…

The concept of "Servant Leadership" is not exactly new [1], Many people are not in the position to argue with their boss when they frame it as an adversarial relationship - That you owe something to the boss for your pay, that it's somehow a privilege they are granting you to work for them. There's no way to prevent those kinds of leaders from having a successful organization except by refusing to work for them and out-competing them, and fundamentally: Crime does pay, sometimes for long enough to starve legitimate competition out.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servant_leadership#History

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#278

Software is in the walls. At some point legislators are going to come and ask the question how we stop things like this happening and if the Fujitsu's of the world don't have an answer then we can expect regulation that will likely embed practices that don't help. I don't think we take software reliability seriously enough, most of our focus is on speed of release, ever quicker cycles and it being OK to break things.…

> I don't think we take software reliability seriously enough, most of our focus is on speed of release, ever quicker cycles and it being OK to break things. This culture ruined these peoples lives. Things must change.

I disagree. The needed quality of your software changes dramatically depending on what it is used for. Something that helps someome semi-automate their workflow where bugs just mean they have to do things manually (as things that are wrong fail quickly and obviously) is something where what matters is speed of release and features. Something calculating how long people should be in prison needs to care about quality.

Anyway, the courts are the ones that have the biggest share of the blame here. Believing an unreliable witness for the prosecution is a common cause of injustice.

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and no. We have some marvelous CI/D tools at hand, but the execs are the ones that push to release before ripe, and they won't let things like auto-test failures get in the way of MVP. There was a comment here, some time ago, that was made by someone that proclaimed themselves to have started and successfully exited a number of companies. It went something like "If you do not get physically sick, looking at the…

That sounds like bad engineers. Set your CI/CD to fail to merge code if any automated tests fails. We're not talking weeks of extra work to get tests to pass. I think that as soon as we say "zeitgeist" we're abandoning all attempts at understanding the full picture. There are huge numbers of tests being written all over the place, particularly with modern software tooling. It's the older stuff (e.g. Oracle Forms) or…

The main issue is management; not engineering. I'm actually quite chuffed at some of the amazing tools I have at my disposal, these days (like profilers and code coverage tools, as well as runtime debuggers). I "grew up" in tech from the early 1980s, and things have changed.

The one thing I miss are ICEs (In-Circuit Emulators). Those were badass, but processors are so massive, and so fast, that a real ICE would probably cost a couple of million dollars, and be out of date by the time it hit the market.

Tech can't fix bad managers, and money is like Miracle-Gro™ for bad management, if it incentivizes rotten quality.

Obligatory MonkeyUser: https://www.monkeyuser.com/2021/introduction/

Re: UK court clears post office staff convicted due to ‘corrupt data’

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've just recently had a trooper make 4 "mistakes" in court and in official reports. One of which I believe was an outright lie. The system doesn't care. If this were any other witness they would be discredited, but because they are law enforcement, they get a free pass. The agencies won't even handle the complaints correctly or file this information as Guglio data for when future cases request it (if found to be unr…

> The reason they state is to uphold the integrity of, and the public trust in, the system. Here's another dangerous idea: the justice system has false positive rates. A judgement is a test with two possible results: innocent or guilty. Every test has false positives and false negativies. For every judge, there is a chance they'll condemn the innocent or absolve the guilty. How likely is it? We'll never know.

Appeals and Innocence Project type data should give some idea. Some states even have official programs to investigate peoples innocence after conviction. So it definitely happens more than it should and there should be some data out there.

From my personal experience, it seemed like everyone I dealt with who was part if the system was either incompetent, made mistakes, or might have even been covering things up. The trooper I already mentioned. The corporal investigating him said the trooper's lie was just a misunderstanding, but offered no reasoning or evidence to support that. He also overlooked some other things that were violations of policy (they only cited him for one reg when he fit several). The Sargent who approved the citation said he couldn't do anything about it even if it's incorrect, which is wrong because he can take action based on what the LT told me later. The LT investigated a follow up complaint (the trooper never took the corrective actions listed in first complaint). He didn't follow the correct complaint procedures since he closed the complaint without any notes or findings. I had to call IA, then I assume IA called him since the LT called me a day or two later. He can't even answer basic questions like what laws he used to determine the rules of criminal procedure weren't broken and if he investigated the trooper's conduct as prosecutorial misconduct since he acted as the prosecution and knowingly held an incorrect charge and made several misstatements in court (that we have evidence for). The first magistrate we got gave a continuance. He was arrested on unrelated charges. The second magistrate gave another continuance and thought that we were calling him prejudice when asking to dismiss with prejudice (most magistrates in my state are not lawyers). The third magistrate was a retired police cheif who showed bias, wouldn't let us present a motion, misapplied the law, and was yelling at us to the point his face turned red and he was not understandable due to a lack of air. The ADA originally assigned to the case had an email complaint and the information to confirm that the trooper knew this was an incorrect charge and that the citation didn't even claim the elements of the offense were met, yet they took no action and allowed us to be subjected to those pretrial restrictions. At the appeal, the new ADA tried to misapply the law, with some success. They also told the court administrator/scheduling not to talk to us and not to accommodate any of our witnesses without their approval, which normal for other types of cases with standard discovery procedures, but those don't apply here. The judge actually contradicted his himself in some of his reasons for his determinations - at one point saying a trial de novo is a complete do-over so he won't allow any record from that trial to be used and later saying you would need a record of the previous trial in order to have the charge dismissed. He then misapplied the law and would not even look at, or accept as evidence, an official letter from a state agency that helps define an ambiguous term in the law, which would show us to be in compliance with the law. Even without the letter, the principle of lenity and the rules of statutory construction were blatantly ignored. There were also some paperwork and administrative mishaps, like some information not being recorded and later spending 30 minutes on a moot motion, or the court refusing to provide us with the amended citation with the new charge because "we don't have anything to give you" eventhough it's in the file. The other party was in violation of two similar laws the this one, yet the trooper and DA office decided not to investigate/prosecute even when she admitted being in violation for one offense. So much for the law applying equally.

So yeah, in my view the system has no integrity and is severely broken. I have little faith in justice actually being carried out. I guarantee many people have been convicted who were innocent. I think it's mostly due to the fact that innocent until proven guilty doesn't exist anymore.

Post reply on HN