Come on. We're dealing with qualified professionals here. The buck stops with them. A professional civil engineer blaming a new untested simulation software af

Come on. We're dealing with qualified professionals here. The buck stops with them. A professional civil engineer blaming a new untested simulation software after a bridge fails and causes injury - does it matter what the software claimed to do? It could claim itself to be god, but it's still up to the professionals to evaluate and select the tools they choose to use. It's not like they were using an industry-standard tool they've been using for many years and it suddenly did something unexpected. This is clearly carelessness. A basic out-of-bound check on the cases it hallucinated would be part of basic due-diligence. Digitized case indices are available within minutes. What's even more egregious is that they went to the same tool to confirm its own reliability after they got some indication that it was unreliable. It doesn't take a professional to have commonsense.