Re: I have a feeling this all stems from Panos Panay's approach.
>In that case, bluntly, it's how many deaths you prevent that matters and why there are strict safety standards, where it matters and why those standards don't apply to everything, otherwise you'd be so locked down/walking in treacle, in terms of rules/regs you'd never get out of bed.
Not really it's a case of what the bean counters have worked out what it costs to prevent vs what it costs in litigation. The classic case being the Ford Pinto:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Cost-benefit_analysis.2C_the_Pinto_Memo
And of course the most recent example with software attempting to overcome hardware shortfalls, the VW diesel scandal.
If companies think they can get away with it they'll give it a damn good try, profits first customer second.
The Able pharmaceuticals scandal:
http://www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/Processing/FDA-debars-four-QC-officials-over-Able-Labs-recall-scandal.
Or the Therac-25 debacle, a textbook example of poor code QC/QA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
Yes people make mistakes we are only human but don't let corporations make mistakes by deliberate and conscious financial decisions that we may have to pay with our lives before they are forced to make the changes after the fact. When they are caught out it's some poor patsy having to take the fall while the real villains get away with it.
How many shortcuts are taken with your software for the sake of convenience and cost ?