But we can all laugh about it now…

Posted October 4, 2006 By The Macalope

Perusing Peter Coffee’s Dirty Dozen IT Embarrassments, the Macalope was a little surprised by the jovial cartoon that accompanies number 3.

In this instance, eWeek probably should have reconsidered the format of the piece based on the content.

UPDATE:  Peter Coffee responds in comments:

We wrestled with precisely this question during development of this list; my conclusions, and my decision to use the incident as one of our twelve examples, are elaborated at [this link].

I invite discussion there.

Comments
  • Peter Coffee:

    We wrestled with precisely this question during development of this list; my conclusions, and my decision to use the incident as one of our twelve examples, are elaborated at http://blog.eweek.com/blogs/eweek_labs/archive/2006/10/04/DirtyDozenITEmbarrassments.aspx

    I invite discussion there.

    – Peter Coffee, eWEEK

    Reply October 4, 2006 at 2:40 pm
  • reardon_frank:

    The illustration seems to show Sailors in a panic, not burning bodies, planes exploding or honey roast nuts falling from the sky. I think you’ve got your Macalope Bloomers in a bunch over nothing particularly freaky. Watch the facsists on Late Night television and write a note to each Network at the *giggles* they find with human suffering each night if you need a soap box …

    Reply October 4, 2006 at 4:17 pm
  • Eric:

    This cartoon is incorrect because there was never a software problem that caused this incident. I actually work at the facility that is involved in desing and test for this system, and is also the same facility where the data tapes were brought to resurrect what actually happened. The short story is that the system was working properly, but the humans were using faulty data to make their decisions. The operators on the actual weapon system were getting proper data, but other operators using other systems THOUGHT they had conflicting data. The perceived an inbound target, at a dive angle, with increasing speed. In actuality, what the system saw and reported was an “inbound” (meaning in the same heading as the ship) target, at an elevated angle, with increasing speed. Exactly what they should have seen with an aircraft taking off and entering its cruising altitude and lane. I have the report not 2 feet away.

    Reply October 5, 2006 at 9:51 am
Leave a Comment