Re: Re: OT: Software & Liability

one point you don't touch on is the effect on cost of software.

As I pointed out, improving the quality/security of software will cost the manufacturers more. This cost will most likely be passed on to the consumer. Is this a bad thing though? Think of the auto industry for a moment. Was putting in seatbelts a bad move because it made cars more expensive to produce?

How many software companies will close up shop because they cannot deal with this increased costs?

Probably a fair number, but if they can't ensure the quality of their software, should they be producing it in the first place?

If Quake 7 crashes your system because your video drivers are to old, do you get to sue because they said they supported your card?

If you drive at 200k/h with 10 year old tires down an icy road, is the car manufacturer liable for your accident?

Comment on Re: Re: OT: Software & Liability

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: OT: Software & Liability by dsheroh (Monsignor) on May 21, 2002 at 16:28 UTC
Was putting in seatbelts a bad move because it made cars more expensive to produce? Bad analogy. Seat belts are a marginal expense on a car (I have a hard time believing that they would even add $500 (3%) to the cost of a $15,000 car). The reason that so much current software is so shoddy is because doing it Right would increase the cost of development substantially. Add insurance, bonding, auditing, and other methods of protecting against the possibility (certainty) that a bug slipped past QA on top of that, and you're looking at software production costs increasing by an order of magnitude or so. And that's probably optimistic.	[reply]
Re(4): OT: Software & Liability by cjf (Parson) on May 21, 2002 at 19:07 UTC
Seat belts are a marginal expense on a car Consider all the testing and research that went into making cars safer. This is a substantial amount.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: OT: Software & Liability by Rex(Wrecks) (Curate) on May 21, 2002 at 17:31 UTC
Old Video drivers versus 200 miles per hour is not right. My point was more like, do you know the torque of your motor mounts in your car? and if you do is every operator supposed to know that about thier car? and if they don't it's thier own fault if the tranny separates from the engine at high speed? For the folks (at least most of us) who hang out here in the monastary, we can maintain our systems without a "mechanic", what about those who can't? With the version and patch hell we have already created (and would only get worse) no software company can or will ensure that kind of stability. I guess my point is: "Where are the lines drawn? and who draws them?" "Nothing is sure but death and taxes" I say combine the two and its death to all taxes!	[reply]
Re(4): OT: Software & Liability by cjf (Parson) on May 21, 2002 at 19:12 UTC
Old Video drivers versus 200 miles per hour is not right. Perhaps, the example was meant to show that there are limits on liability. Where are the lines drawn? and who draws them? Your call, politicians, judges, or someone else who most likely has very little knowledge on the issue.	[reply]


go ahead... be a heretic
	PerlMonks