No, both this and the original blog entry are myopic. There have been companies that went out of business, not only the software publisher but companies that r

No, both this and the original blog entry are myopic. There have been companies that went out of business, not only the software publisher but companies that relied on such software. If the assertion is that "known unknown" bugs exist in code, and the publishers are aware that there might be bugs but in their QA/QC could not identify them, I can accept it. But, if the assertion is that there are "known known" bugs exists, I find it bordering unethical. The only way I can accept this if the publishers informs the buyer, and let them know what is the impact, the plan of action to remediate or mitigate the bug, and in what time frame. "Known known bugs" (the publisher knew about the bug for extended period of time, and never informed the users) have destroyed multitude of businesses.