I believe the safety factors in Falcon 9 are 1.4. NASA credited SpaceX with using safety factors larger than normal for aerospace.
replySurely reusability requires higher margins than ever needed before.
replyIt's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether. And stop calling me Shirley.
replyOne might make the same observations about software “bugginess” and complexity. The pace of improvement is such that everyone is riding the bleeding edge and, as such, the carpet inevitably gets a few spots of blood on it.
replySoftware quality sucks because the consequences for getting it wrong are low for the people and organizations making it.
replyWhich is often fine, but sometimes isn't.
I have come to think that the reason why people are prepared to accept AI slop is because the software industry was so blase about quality. They already had slop, now they get it cheaper.
replyAI is the fentanyl to JavaScript bootcamp heroin.
You're giving the system too much credit. The users and the SWEs don't get a choice in this, they eat whatever the thought leaders and PMs spec out. They are the ones who make the decisions, you can either get on board or look for a new job.
replyThere isn't an actual diverse ecosystem of most consumer software, just a monoculture of largely undifferentiated clones.