3 ms·
> You are clearly unaware of the legal requirements here. I am definitely unaware. If you do know the specific law/infraction, please link to it as that would
by libria 4y ago
> You are clearly unaware of the legal requirements here.
I am definitely unaware. If you do know the specific law/infraction, please link to it as that would help the discussion.
It doesn't help to vaguely hand-wave (emotionally I would argue) "Someone should go to jail!!". As I asked above, which people? How much jail? And what are the clearly defined laws?
There are engineers that deal directly with code critical to public safety and the amount of verification, compliance, testing, authorization, permits, processes, legal reviews, etc involved in that pipeline increase costs and delays 10-fold, but they are extremely safe and reliable.
Not saying we shouldn't do this for an emergency device, but it most certainly will not be cost-free, few engineers would want to be involved and consumers will not want to buy it.
- dagmx 4y agoFirst of all…did you change to an alt account? I don’t see libria anywhere in my reply chain above but you’re responding as if you’re bjt2n3904 Secondly nobody mentioned jail. Criminal investigation doesn’t mean jail time especially for corporations. Criminal negligence can just mean fines and a requirement to resolve the issue You’re also acting as if people are saying the whole device and all software should be infallible. That’s not the requirement. Legally any cellular device needs to be able to contact emergency services as long as there are no extenuating circumstances (dead battery, no connectivity). This is federally mandated in many countries. That Google has repeated failures to do so, across multiple countries and across a long period of time means that they are in violation of government rules. You’re being intentionally obtuse on these points.