HackerTube.dev

Velocity 2012: Richard Cook, "How Complex Systems Fail"

O'Reilly · 60.1K views · 2012-06-27 · 28:21

Open on YouTube ↗

If playback is restricted in your region, try opening the original video. Use Mark watched to add it to your marked videos.

Overview

Dr. Richard Cook, a physician and patient safety researcher, presents his ideas on how complex systems fail, at Velocity 2012. He argues for designing for resiliency rather than trying to exhaustively handle every failure mode.

On Hacker News

HN people recommend it as a must-watch for anyone running complex systems, and some rewatch it regularly to remember its principles.

Recommended by 3 HN people across 4 months · HN mentions 2013–2021

Topics

Search by tags

What people said

wenc · 2020-12 · Strong recommendation

The accompanying talk by Richard I Cook at the O'Reilly Velocity conference is here: [VIDEO] When I worked in operations, I would watch this talk every couple of months to remind myself of the principles. The principles are summarized in the list, but the talk adds a bit more context. I find that this context matters for seeing how the principles might be applied.

Read the original HN comment ↗
wenc · 2019-01 · Recommendation

> We should probably be doing modelling and formal verification and stuff like that. This is interesting. Is this a hypothetical notion or can you share any personal experience of having worked on any projects where this is done successfully? I bring this up because there is typically a narrow band of applicability of purely theoretical constructs in most complex systems (AWS & Azure teams both use formal methods [1] to find bugs and to increase confidence in critical algorithms but I don't believe they do this system-wide. Also the verification is only done on the abstraction, not the actual implementation.). Richard Cook gave a talk on "How Complex Systems Fail" [2] which addresses this point, and advocates for designing for resiliency as opposed to designing to exhaustively handle all failure modes (which are impossible to predict). Design people often design from some idealized notion of inputs and/or worst case scenarios. Ops people know what can go wrong will go wrong, which is why ops is there to handle the deviations from the norm. Real world design exposes lift points, reveals controls and supports continuous maintenance. Highly reliable systems are evolved, not just designed. [1] [LINK] [2] [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
wenc · 2019-01 · Recommendation

To build on this discussion, what are some highlights in that book that you found useful? I ask because I've read some systems thinking books (e.g. Systemantics) that were difficult to apply in real life. I come from the perspective of someone with a systems/theory builder personality. The only systems thinking book that I found remotely practical was The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge. The most useful piece of short writing on systems thinking that I've come across is "How Complex Systems Fail" [1, 2], which talks about designing systems for resiliency, and not for rigid notions of reliability. [1] "How Complex Systems Fail" [LINK] [2] Its accompanying O'Reilly conference talk [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗

Sources

Video by O'Reilly, played through YouTube.

Data and selection notes

HN summaries and labels may contain AI errors. HN dates refer to discussions, not video publication.

HN Library: HackerTube export (2026-10-31) and open-index/hacker-news. Upstream summaries and classifications may contain AI errors.

Views, duration and playback status refresh separately from the published catalog. When an update fails, existing data remains visible.

Selection checks
  • SaaS & AI candidates: Topic keywords do not match
  • Editor-approved picks: Editorial review is required

Rule matches identify candidates. They do not guarantee video quality or financial results.

About the library and its sources