No. My argument is that bond defaulting is a legal status. Not a server outage. And that we are getting into larp territory with no evidence they are tampering with bonds.
Yes, but the fact that it is even a question is absurd.
I guess my thought is that you have a boss that told you to touch a computer system, normally only a few people touch it, because of you make a mistake, your company looses 100 billion dollars.
You make pretty sure that whoever is dealing with that system are experts, you make sure that they do not modify it without following procedures, you double/triple check that their change won't have side affects, you then run the changes on a test system just to make sure.
And yeah, you are only adding a print statement, it should be fine...
But what if it's not.
Move fast and break things is fine if worst case scenario your social media site goes down.
Move fast and break things is less fine when you could fuck up a key piece of financial infrastructure.
I don't have evidence of anything, no one does. We don't have evidence that there won't be any mistakes either.
In the past we could expect reliability, because the system was always reliable, within the processes and systems that people implemented around it.
It seems to me that a lot of those processes have been skipped.
