The point isn't that "a system cannot fail", the point is "if the system fails, it's no big deal, shit happens, cut them some slack" is a weird way to look at it for corporate systems, especially in sensitive areas.
If you're running a HA system and you only need one nine to express your availability percentage, sure, sure, you have the smartest people etc and you're doing such a great job, and yeah, yeah, show me one system that has 100% uptime etc.
It didn't say it's no big deal, you're extrapolating and exaggerating my words because your argument is weak.
My point was that failure is inevitable in any complex system, and I was responding to the parents point that he immediately pointed the finger at management in an accusatory way, and I was saying that's not constructive.
Also your point "They expect to be paid" isactually implicitly "I expect management do do their best to pay me" - there could be a failure in the payroll system, there could be a failure in the banks, there could be many reasons outside managements control that means I'm not getting paid. I can say "why don't you have redundant payroll systems" (which is a stupid waste of resources given the cost/benefit/low failure rate) But my point is again - complex systems have failures - and SOMETIMES, JUST SOMETIMES, YOU CAN CUT THEM SOME SLACK.
When a fiduciary breaks their duty to their clients, you don’t cut them slack. You sue them. This isn’t like Silicon Valley where you can get away with antics like this.
You must be new here, welcome to late stage capitalism. Nobody rich goes to jail, and lawsuits are cost of business. You just factor them into the 5 billion dollar company, pay your 300M dollar fine and walk away a billionaire.
