Data Sharing

We hear a lot about "big data". Well, that can just mean lots of organizations have big databases. The reason we need to care about it is data sharing. And that matters no matter how big the data is. When data was first gathered in computers in databases, it was to enhance customer service. You could find things easier when relational databases came along. You had to backup your data in case the computer crashed. Now. Data is a commodity. And we both expect and are fearful of the data sharing between entities. Sometimes on purpose, sometimes by accident. And that data sharing isn't without its mistakes. Because big data doesn't just mean a large database. At this point, companies have lots of databases. Often with similar data, that share.
Here is where quality software comes in. Data sharing involves asking important questions - who owns the data? who is responsible for the data? who cares for the data? When you share something, you have joint ownership. Though in the sense of sharing a cup of tea or sugar or a tool, you may give something to someone, and it is their business what they do with it.
I worry less about big data. That is just hoarding. From a quality perspective, I want the data to be shared only when it should be, in the safest manner possible, as little as possible. Sharing data doesn't necessarily make things easier for good customer service. Only when the right questions are asked, and the sharing is based on understanding the answers.

A New Year - Where is Software in 2017

 In 2017, software in the car is going to expand. Car manufacturers are trying to create the self driving car. It seems pretty important, then, that the software is top quality. What does that mean? Well, it means that when Elon Musk declares that he will have a real self driving car soon, his engineers are probably pretty stressed. Because one of the contributions to poor software is software that is sold with a deadline before it is built. I just watched a show talking about Ford (the person) and Ferrari (the person), engaged in a battle 50 years ago to have their cars win the LeMond 24 hour race. Now Ferrari (the company) had been dominating the race for years, but Ford was determined to best them. The first year, the Ford cars were terribly unstable, crashed and burned (literally). The second year, Ford entered many more cars, put his best engineers on the case, including the famous Shelby, and still, Ford failed. In year 3, however, the cars were finally ready.  And they won. Ferrari, in fact, did not place.

Without a challenge, the best software might not be built. And the self driving car is a very interesting idea. It fits my view that software should serve a purpose. We pin our hopes on a self driving car for less crashes, less congestion, and many other things. So, I look forward to this application of software.

The first self driving cars may fail, and do so spectacularly. But from those failures will come successes. And given time, the best engineers will work out the dangers. It may never be the case that there isn't a 'driver' (see the airlines and the auto-pilot), but that's ok. Software should serve, not eliminate, humanity.