Here’s the thing folks. I’ve been coding 32 years. When something like this happens it��s an organizational failure. Yes, some human wrote a bad line. Someone can “git blame” and point to a human and it’s awful. But it’s the testing, the Cl/CD, the A/B testing, the metered rollouts, an oh shit button to roll it back, the code coverage, the static analysis tools, the code reviews, the organizational health, and on and on. It’s always one line of code but it’s NEVER one person. Implying inclusion policies caused a bug is simplistic, reductive, and racist. Engineering is a team sport. Inclusion makes for good teams. Good engineering practices makes for good software. Engineering practices failed to find a bug multiple times, regardless of the seniority of the human who checked that code in. Solving the larger system thinking SDLC matters more than the null pointer check. This isn’t a “git gud C++ is hard” issue and it damn well isn’t an DEI one.
@grandMa5ter @Asher_Wolf I’d also suggest that if anyone has a significant number of data scientists, and a clear view of ethics that is bound by law, it’s them.
@raymatp07@InsiderPhD You said the above as a bad example, but I think there are benefits.
It's also funny that you call it absurd which is kinda of the behaviour that was being called out through the idea. You can give an opinion on an idea in a constructive way.