[mojzu]

> Hardware bugs can cause hardware damage.

That's true, although I think the original point was that if software can damage the hardware it's running on then that should be seen as a fault/bug, but with cost reduction/market pressures/etc. it is often ignored

And fail-safe doesn't necessarily mean everything turns off because that can be just as dangerous, I take it more as a systems mindset where thought, care and attention are paid to failure conditions and making sure those outcomes pose the least risk. Again something which can often be ignored for cost or expediency reasons

Perfection is probably an unattainable goal but I've been around software long enough that I wouldn't want someones safety to depend solely on one piece of software

[throwawaylinux]

> if software can damage the hardware it's running on then that should be seen as a fault/bug

It is.

And I'm still waiting to hear how that absolutely fail-safe bridge is going to work...

[salawat]

Easy. You set your safety factor in excess of expected everyday load.

The fact is, Engineering has become the Art of specifying the worst (read: cheapest) implementation one can get away with.