Can the microcontroller reboot? Oops, maybe you're not authorized anymore because the default stance is "deny" and you can't call home (otherwise you just block communication and you have a functional vest).

This isn't theoretical. A watchdog timer is standard protection against weird "shit happens", one-off things in safety equipment. That means you reboot when something goes wrong (cosmic rays, flaky battery connections, etc.).

DJs wouldn't use software that uses things like FlexLM because it might hang in the middle of their performance because it is "default deny". And that is nowhere near the level of importance as a safety jacket.

I have no idea if it has corner-case failure modes, it probably does, like all products including your car. However, the product page for the vest mentions it has adventure mode, which means the rider is expected to be out of range of cell service for periods of time, so it seems evident that they might have thought about microcontroller reboots, since the device is going to be powered on and off out of range anyway.

I don’t understand why there is a flood of pure speculation in this comment section assuming that the design must be worst-case and trash. There’s no reason to jump to that unfounded conclusion.

> I don’t understand why there is a flood of pure speculation in this comment section assuming that the design must be worst-case and trash.

The implementation is irrelevant because the fundamental idea is horribly broken.

"Default deny" and "safety equipment" are like oil and fire.

(If you really want to understand why this is stupid: Just go use some software with the FlexLM license manager and you will understand at a deep psychological level why this is a horrible idea.)

I see that you are very certain. Why are you so certain, when the reasons you’ve given are based on speculation? All license managers are default deny, that’s the purpose of licensing, I don’t see your point.

Maybe it would be better to propose a clear and workable alternative rather than re-stating your opinion of the thing you imagine this is. Do you have a suggestion for how to improve the vest or it’s financing plan, one that doesn’t damage their business model from their perspective and also improves safety?

> “Default deny” and “safety equipment” are like oil and fire.

I’m not sure it’s worth discussing this platitude, it might or might not be true, and it might or might not be relevant. The fact of the matter is that in this particular case, the default deny aspect of the vest’s system and the safety features were designed so they don’t intersect. You’re asserting that they do, but the documentation says otherwise. Why are you ignoring their statements on the matter? It makes the argument weaker. If you’re certain it’s a bad design, then show how it’s a bad design despite what they say, rather than forming reasons by willfully disregarding valid information.