I have read the proposed amendment, and it still looks woefully insufficient. It changes the rules from "software is presumed to be reliable" to "software previ

I have read the proposed amendment, and it still looks woefully insufficient. It changes the rules from "software is presumed to be reliable" to "software previously certified by any government authority is presumed to be reliable." This applies even if the certification body did not, in fact, do any significant stress-testing that would, e.g., uncover the races, or was not aware of the specific use case that triggers a bug. In other words: "the Court will presume correct operation of the computer system and will ignore the fact that the other party challenges this; the amendment references certifications coming from a government body at any time in the past as a valid basis to ignore such challenges."