Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Apr 2012 02:08 UTC
In the News "Modern science relies upon researchers sharing their work so that their peers can check and verify success or failure. But most scientists still don't share one crucial piece of information - the source codes of the computer programs driving much of today's scientific progress." Pretty crazy this isn't the norm yet.
Thread beginning with comment 514320
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Yes and no
by renox on Mon 16th Apr 2012 08:32 UTC in reply to "Yes and no"
renox
Member since:
2005-07-06

There is something to be said about scientists having to recreate source code in a clean room environment because errors in either code or hypothesis is easier to expose.


I'm not so sure: there was a time where a popular idea to produce safe code (for avionics or things like that) was to have several independant teams coding the same software to have different bugs.
A study discovered then that independants teams had quite a few identical bugs, so it became much less popular!

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Yes and no
by kwan_e on Mon 16th Apr 2012 08:59 in reply to "RE: Yes and no"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

A study discovered then that independants teams had quite a few identical bugs, so it became much less popular!


Yes, but with scientific research spread all over the world, we can afford to have more teams than any single organization can afford.

And again, I refer people to the Climategate non-scandal. What if it turns out everyone who verified the data were using the same code, or at least derived versions of the same code? Think about the fallout from that. Even if the bugs were mostly identical, do we want to risk being wrong?

Reply Parent Score: 1