Xref: utzoo news.sysadmin:1437 comp.protocols.tcp-ip:5334
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!oberon!orion.cf.uci.edu!ucsd!ucsbcsl!hbo@sbphy.ucsb.edu
From: hbo@sbphy.ucsb.edu (Howard B. Owen)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: "Morris did it"--the new excuse?
Message-ID: <978@hub.ucsb.edu>
Date: 13 Nov 88 23:39:38 GMT
Sender: news@hub.ucsb.edu
Organization: UC, Santa Barbara. Physics Computer Services
Lines: 20

In article <16915@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu 
(Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes...

>   ...             I've never worked assuming that the machines I use
>are 100% reliable.  Do the scientists/researchers at your site do so--
>even on critical stuff?   ...

   Scientists at my site know that computers and networks go up and down. 
Nevertheless, they tend to depend on both to get their work done. One group
here does a lot of montecarlo type work. They use Cray time at SDSC. If the
internet link is down, their work stops. Without supercomputers, and the
high speed networks to connect them, a lot of physics research simply wouldn't
happen. It doesn't matter that computers aren't 100% reliable; they are the only
tool for the job.

   While I agree with the idea that tool reliability should be carefully
considered when undertaking a job, I don't think failure to do so contributed
greatly to the damage done by the recent unpleasantness. The blame for lost
computer time and disrupted research lies not with unreasonable expectations
on the part of users, but with the originator of the worm.