A journalist asked me today, “is all software going to be done in the beta culture way?”
I replied that no - there need to be limits. A line that you should not cross.
Coincidentally, Ivan Kuznetsov had written decisively against such movement yesterday:
Beta culture seems to be spreading from internet startups to bank systems (although in this case I would be more inclined to say that this was a huge screw up on Danske Bank IT department’s part). I’m not sure I like it. Gmail beta, Flickr beta, but Sampo Bank beta? It’s definitely fun to participate in debugging of the new web service, but not when it deals with your real money.
I totally agree.
I would say that “beta culture” is irresponsible and unacceptable whenever:
- You charge the users directly, or
- The downside risk is more significant than the expected benefit of running a beta, like:
- Losing your money or something you have paid for (say, software for Mars rover spacecraft)
- Losing your precious data (say, software that screws up your lifetime photo collection)
- Losing your life / health (say, software for your pacemaker)
- Causing collateral damage to others (say, software for a nuclear power plant)
- Breaching ultra-sensitive private data
At least this is how I see it. What do you think yourself, what should be the limits of beta culture?
Original post by Tommi Vilkamo
