There seems to be a disconnect between his argument for tighter engineering standards as the single key for building better software and the stated fact that so

There seems to be a disconnect between his argument for tighter engineering standards as the single key for building better software and the stated fact that software is not bound by the constraints of physical reality. In designing and producing the physical components of a 747 (like a bolt to use his example), there isn't the same level of potential abstraction as there is for even a very basic software component. The fact that he's talking specifically about the development of a secure OS does strengthen his argument though. So in that sense I agree with him.