“Hey dad, the WiFi in my dorm room keeps cutting out”

“Have you gotten your Ethernet hooked up yet?”

“Hey dad, when I try to stream TV, it keeps buffering”

“Have you gotten your Ethernet hooked up yet?”

Someday they’ll get it.

Yeah, I’ve been working in aerospace, automotive, industrial and rail safety for over 20 years. You don’t get to say “this software does thing” and then in the safety manual say “you don’t get to trust that the software will actually do thing”.

Further, when you claim the operator as a layer of protection in your safety system, the probability of dangerous failure is a function of the time between the fault (the software doing something stupid) and the failure (crash). The shorter that time, the less safe the system is.

Here’s a clue: Musk doesn’t know anything about software safety. Their lead in autonomous technology has less to do with technical innovation and more to do with cutting corners where they can get away with it.

So, the software doesn’t actually do anything, it just gives the illusion that it does. That’s sounds safe.

If you are relying on T&C as a get out of jail free card for your safety system, then it isn’t a safety system.

It is a nice break from my day job, where I am certifying software for critical systems.

sigh

Yes, so much. It drove me crazy when a car company argued “but our logs say it was the driver’s fault”. We’re arguing that your most critical software failed, and you want us to trust the logging subsystem?

The NTSC needs to be qualifying car software the same way the FAA qualifies aircraft software. We need to stop trusting the manufacturers to self police.