[SystemSafety] A small taste of what we're up against

[Martyn Thomas]

Michael

That's a fair challenge, but where would the data come from? Fatal
accidents rarely lead top investigation of software defects as a
possible contributory factor, so there are very few automotive
fatalities that are publicly attributed to software defects; but I don't
want to conclude that this shows that automotive software development is
good enough. In the absence of causal data, it seems reasonable to
continue to eliminate avoidable risks.

The usual challenge then is "but show that the benefits justify the
costs".  However, the UK legislation (HSWA) is clear: there is a duty to
reduce risks "so far as is reasonably practicable" and if an employer
wants to claim that this has been done, then the burden of proof is on
the employer, not on those of us who are arguing the contrary opinion.

The employer would need to show that the cost of further risk reduction
would be "grossly disproportionate" to the benefits that would be
obtained. And in the case of vehicles being supplied for work-related
driving, the employer has the duty to carry out any necessary research.

(My understanding only - I'm not a qualified lawyer).

Martyn


On 25/10/2018 10:30, Michael J. Pont wrote:
> Can anyone give me a real-world example of an injury or death that can be
> directly linked to the use of C or C++ in an automotive system?
>
> I don't believe that such an example exists.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 484 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20181025/25ec984a/attachment.sig>