And I say this as someone who's spent time in consulting. The prices would necessarily go up in the face of litigation. But I think it would be well worth it - I'd love to be able to financially justify taking extra time to make the systems I build secure. (I make systems secure anyway of course, but I'm competing with companies packed full of General Assembly grads who don't know what a hashing function is yet.)
Doesn't seem to line up very well with "Move fast and break things"
When it comes to security around my personal data, I don't want anyone to move fast or break things. Businesses should either not bulk collect identifiable data or treat it with the care and diligence it deserves.
And while we're at it if 20 year old self taught rockstar programmers don't have the skills to do that, maybe they should learn. If you're making web software which stores personal information and you can't name 5 of the OWASP top 10 without looking them up, you're a privacy time bomb. I want my personal data far far away from your product.
When it comes to security, move slowly and fix your shit.
Maybe "move fast and break things" isn't an unconditionally great idea.
There are pros and cons to it. It might lead to higher salaries for engineers - liability bringing licensing requirements which could restrict supply.
You are suggesting that a software engineer should be personally liable for the code he writes, just as a civil engineer is liable when he stamps a blueprint.
That would be quite a change for our profession.