"Our lives sometimes depend on computers performing as predicted"
About this Quote
The quiet terror in Emeagwali's line is its understatement: "sometimes" is doing all the work. We like to treat computing as convenience - maps, playlists, optimizations - but he nudges the reader toward the cases where software stops being a tool and becomes infrastructure with teeth. In that world, prediction isn't a nice-to-have feature; it's the difference between a safe landing and a catastrophic one, the correct dosage and a fatal error, a stable power grid and cascading blackout.
"Performing as predicted" also slips in a stricter standard than "working". It points to reliability, verification, and the gap between what code does in a lab and what it does under stress, scale, adversarial input, or messy human usage. The phrasing implies a contract: engineers make promises in logic and math, then reality audits those promises with edge cases. His intent isn't techno-panic; it's a scientist's reminder that deterministic machines don't automatically produce dependable outcomes once they're embedded in complex systems.
Context matters here. Emeagwali is associated with high-performance computing, a field built on pushing machines to their limits. At that edge, tiny deviations - timing, rounding, concurrency bugs - can become enormous. The subtext is an ethics argument dressed as an engineering observation: if we keep outsourcing critical decisions to computation, then predictability isn't just a technical metric, it's a moral requirement. The line lands because it converts an abstract virtue ("correctness") into something bodily and immediate: lives on the line, and no one gets to shrug at a segmentation fault.
"Performing as predicted" also slips in a stricter standard than "working". It points to reliability, verification, and the gap between what code does in a lab and what it does under stress, scale, adversarial input, or messy human usage. The phrasing implies a contract: engineers make promises in logic and math, then reality audits those promises with edge cases. His intent isn't techno-panic; it's a scientist's reminder that deterministic machines don't automatically produce dependable outcomes once they're embedded in complex systems.
Context matters here. Emeagwali is associated with high-performance computing, a field built on pushing machines to their limits. At that edge, tiny deviations - timing, rounding, concurrency bugs - can become enormous. The subtext is an ethics argument dressed as an engineering observation: if we keep outsourcing critical decisions to computation, then predictability isn't just a technical metric, it's a moral requirement. The line lands because it converts an abstract virtue ("correctness") into something bodily and immediate: lives on the line, and no one gets to shrug at a segmentation fault.
Quote Details
| Topic | Technology |
|---|
More Quotes by Philip
Add to List






