I have but one problem with the article, and that is its (very popular for sure) misstatement of Murphy’s law. The law, as originally stated, is “If there are multiple ways to do shit and one of those ways ends in disaster, then invariably one poor sod will take that exact way.” (stated after a trainee had just inadvertently destroyed a very expensive piece of test hardware).

Unlike the popular shortened version, this is solid engineering advice: Don’t leave pathways to pandemonium and expect your users not to take them. But because whatever can go wrong, will go wrong, the quote was lamentably shortened to general pessimism.

score 1 · canonical