JPDev@programming.dev to Comics@programming.dev · 4 months ago[Tom Gauld] Days without an accidentprogramming.devimagemessage-square6fedilinkarrow-up1232arrow-down13
arrow-up1229arrow-down1image[Tom Gauld] Days without an accidentprogramming.devJPDev@programming.dev to Comics@programming.dev · 4 months agomessage-square6fedilink
minus-squareJonC@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up52·4 months agoGuessing they’ve never gone more than 31 days without an accident or they would have needed a bigger sign
minus-squareceenote@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up55·4 months agoThe counter explodes when they try, so the problem solves itself.
minus-squareHuntressHimbo@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up15·4 months agoCounter overrun is itself an accident, so it is always technically correct
minus-squareCodex@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·4 months agoOne of the machines breaks on monthly turnover because no one documents any formats or uses standards at this company. It consumes at least one employee each time, but it’d be expensive to add more numbers to the big sign so no one fixes it.
minus-squareautokludge@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·4 months agoMaybe they have already hit -15 days without incident
![[Tom Gauld] Days without an accident](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/c7992f72-0719-4083-9b56-0ef6f14c0480.webp){kind=link}
Guessing they’ve never gone more than 31 days without an accident or they would have needed a bigger sign
The counter explodes when they try, so the problem solves itself.
Counter overrun is itself an accident, so it is always technically correct
One of the machines breaks on monthly turnover because no one documents any formats or uses standards at this company. It consumes at least one employee each time, but it’d be expensive to add more numbers to the big sign so no one fixes it.
Maybe they have already hit -15 days without incident