Partially agree, the same could be said about the Parallax crowd 20 years ago.
I think the real problem is Abstraction. Most things are assembled as blocks, with no idea how the blocks work. It seems like many projects today consist of, A) Take X microcontroller B) Add Y1, Y2, Yx component blocks (LCD screen, motor controller, etc.) C) Add connecting wires D) Use manufacture supplied libraries E) Add some custom code for your domain.
I think the key came from this video in the first few minutes, when Kernighan talked about a Government Controlled Monopoly where Bell Labs got predictable fixed funding from ATT. I think this is the only way Open Allocation can work on such a scale.
Seems like an insurance policy, except that you get access to the details of past settled cases. Could I not just join as soon as I get served a notice?
True, when I got the email this morning as a response, I had forgotten that I signed the petition. For a few moments I thought something good was going to be published.
As stated, two big variables are clock rate and feature size, which both effect mean time between failures (MTBF). Being more conservative increases this metric. I know from working in a fab that there are many electrical inspection steps along the process, so failures are caught during the manufacturing process (reducing the chance that you see them in the final product). Once the chip is packaged, and assuming that it is operated in a nominal environment, then failures are not that common.
I think the real problem is Abstraction. Most things are assembled as blocks, with no idea how the blocks work. It seems like many projects today consist of, A) Take X microcontroller B) Add Y1, Y2, Yx component blocks (LCD screen, motor controller, etc.) C) Add connecting wires D) Use manufacture supplied libraries E) Add some custom code for your domain.