Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
I'm worried by this story: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/11/fujitsu-repay-post-office-scandal-horizon-it-software
Yes, Fujitsu must shoulder some blame for the faulty technology, and possibly more for being in denial. But Fujitsu did not choose to pursue the users for the "missing" money and prosecute them. There is a considerable human side to this story. We must not let the Post Office offload all the financial responsibility onto Fujitsu.
"We only acted like complete bastards because their software fucked up." won't cut it.
@pigworker has there been reporting on the cause of the miscalculation? Was it a bug? Or a bad design decision? Or an incorrect assumption? Or did the requirements provided by the PO ask them to do it that way?
Then, who tested the system? If the PO have signed it off as being functionally correct, then doesn't that make them partially liable too?
@ajlanes ok, that's long! Have any reputable journalist summarised it? 
(she/her) @guigsy @ajlanes Very useful summary here: https://www.benthamsgaze.org/2021/07/15/what-went-wrong-with-horizon-learning-from-the-post-office-trial/
(h/t @ldodds)
@agvbergin @ajlanes @ldodds ok, that's pretty awful. A good chunk of those failure modes should have been obvious and could have been avoided if common and well known design patterns were used.
@agvbergin @ajlanes agreed. I find it very hard to understand how factual evidence that they uncovered was ignored.
