Hacker News Reader

> at "random", during regular use

Out of all the vague and unprovable things that never happened, that one never happened the most.

I'm sure you can find users on any OS complaining with "random" breakages but unless you can show any data that proves it was due to the OS and not your HW or third party apps or your own actions, this means nothing.

View on HN

Very cool. Of course we both understand that this is the case - this is why it is in scare quotes. You are arguing about something I literally acknowledged in my original post. The issue is that it happened due to what is for all intents and purposes bitrot: It breaks during regular use due to small compounding errors that happen due to bad software design. In practical use this means what I wrote, even though to the most pedantic of nerds it means literally what happened. It can in fact mean both things

>It breaks during regular use due to small compounding errors that happen due to bad software design.

And where's the proof/documentation for this, if it's as common as you suggest?

If it were a design problem as you say, then everyone would have the exact same failures with the same incidence rate, but they don't.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com