I guess they're arguing that the "fail deadly" design was a design flaw, even if... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		bombcar on Nov 9, 2022 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: So long and thanks for all the bits I guess they're arguing that the "fail deadly" design was a design flaw, even if it should never have been encountered in actual operation.

mjb on Nov 10, 2022 [–]

Indeed. See "Why INSAG has still got it wrong" by Anatoly Dyatlov himself. The money quote:

> How and why should the operators have compensated for design errors they did not know about?

Dyatlov is clearly biased here, but he raises excellent questions.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact