<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Application-layer Fault-Tolerance Protocols · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.02273/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.02273/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Application-layer Fault-Tolerance Protocols — mentioned by hackermailman</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19600155</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1611.02273:19600155</guid><pubDate>Sun, 07 Apr 2019 21:53:50 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;For minimizing disaster, the standard grad text for this type of thing is Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications by Axel van Lamsweerde. There you learn about creating models and risk analysis, fault tolerance modeling[1], privacy requirements etc., all established methods based on engineering foundations but applied to software modeling and development. If you mean software development for mission critical things that control movement like aircraft, drones, factory robots etc., these engineers I would assume use verified compilers/toolchains like…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.02273/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.SE</category></item></channel></rss>
