(1) Automotive (2) Medical Devices (3) Aerospace

In my mind, all three are done with more or less similar rigour conforming to strict standards. Yet, exceptions are seen in all of them.

I remember when this was happening and I was surprised to learn that not only were there no good standards in automotive, reputable manufacturers like toyota didn’t even follow their own internal standards when developing software for critical bits.

Or to rephrase: it would appear they made no credible effort given the types of defects that occurred.

> strict standards

According to the PDF, they are not actually required to adhere to any software standards, and they did not always follow their own coding rules. An internal email admitted that "technology such as failsafe is not part of the Toyota’s engineering division’s DNA". They didn't even have bug trackers, config management OR COMMENTS in the 250k+ lines of code that were looked at. The software was full of bugs and terrible coding practices, plus the CPU was routinely pushed way too close to 100%. The ETCS code in question also had no unit tests, but it would be impossible to have them anyway due to their use of recursion in the code, which is also not supposed to be used in safety-critical systems.

In my mind, the software for at least the first two is typically written by people who don't primarily have an IT background, and at least in the past it was very clear that no skilled IT security engineers with any even reasonably recent knowledge were involved.

Not everyone can write embedded systems software. And I strongly disagree with medical devices. Peoples lives depend on them working.

I think the problem is that many software developers can't do embedded, but many electrical engineers can't do software.

Do you disagree that the software for medical devices is written badly, or are you just saying that it should be written well? I don't think the latter is in dispute. For the former, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/31/hacking-r...

The truth is that embedded, safety critical software requires a set of skills that is not normally taught in computer science or in electrical engineering degrees unless the students intentionally specialize in that direction.

The problem is the first is regularly not maintained anywhere near the levels required, especially as the car gets older.

One thing that surprised me, was that in the case of cars there is no third party doing the certification.

I had an early 80s Accord with a sticky throttle. I almost wrecked my car many times because of it and I'm shocked I'm even here to type this.

There are loads of people on here who have never driven cable-controlled throttles, rack-and-pinion assisted steering... I'd even guess there are a few that haven't used manual windows or hand-adjusted rear view mirrors (the kind you have to lean waaaay over to fix), and probably lots that haven't driven brakes without ABS, especially in the winter.

I can't believe I didn't think of it, but... I didn't realize that older throttles could get stuck.

I do know that power steering is literally the difference between smaller women being able to drive and not. I had an old Ford Aspire that a couple of my friends just couldn't drive because they couldn't turn it if it wasn't moving at road speeds.

>I do know that power steering is literally the difference between smaller women being able to drive and not

Only because once it's a standard feature other engineering departments start doing things that requires the system to be there in order to get good results.

The steering geometry that keeps modern (like mid 00s on up, the "wide tread, narrow sidewall" era) cars from wandering on crowned roads substantially increases steering force required.

It's not like small women didn't drive 60s barges just fine without power steering.

My mom used to drive an old Volvo wagon. It weighed a ton and didn't even come with power steering. Just a huge wheel to make the leverage a bit easier. She knew the real trick though, turn the wheel while the car was even just slightly moving. Even less than 1mph was enough movement to lighten the steering feel.

That’s not a trick, that’s just good driving. Turning the wheel while stationary is called dry steering and is not good for the power steering system, the tires, or even the road surface.

That's like saying under-cooked vegetables will wear out your cutlery faster than cooked vegetables. It's probably technically true but in practice it doesn't matter.

I learned this lesson the hard way, when they just re-paved our street I took my dad's truck out and dry steered on the fresh asphalt. It carved a rut in the road. It's pretty bad for your tires too.

Having power steering allows one to have more aggressive caster angle and KPI which improves suspension performance too.

  > It's not like small women didn't drive 60s barges just fine without power steering.

Those vehicles had almost no castor (you mention that) but also had huge steering wheels. The advent of power steering led to the evolution of other components actually requiring it.

That's probably what made it hard to drive the Aspire. It had like a 13 inch steering wheel. I didn't measure it, but it was pretty small.

The other change is both steering wheels and steering ratios[1] have gotten smaller.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steering_ratio

> hand-adjusted rear view mirrors

Do you mean side mirrors? I recall when you needed to lean over to the passenger side to adjust it.

I recall when they didn't put them on the passenger side.

Yeah, that Civic didn't have a passenger side mirror. Visibility was so great anyways I never felt the lack. Probably would have killed me to death in a rollover since it was just a bubble of sheet metal and glass. But oh boy could I see things around me.

yeah, the side mirrors

Makes sense since most current rear-view mirrors are still manually adjustable.

That Civic didn't even have power steering. I think it was a fancy option that the previous owner didn't feel they needed. If you were moving more than 1 mph you could turn it easily if the tires were properly inflated. You could feel the texture of the road through the steering wheel and stay in your lane by the feel of the worn pavement. If you were elderly or disabled, it sucked terribly. However it was a good little shoe car for a teenager who didn't have much money for gas.

One thing I absolutely hate these days is cars without a shifter lever. The stupid knobs that killed Anton Yelchin, the new Ford junk that won't shift if the car doesn't have battery, etc.... Also, electric parking breaks.

>I can't believe I didn't think of it, but... I didn't realize that older throttles could get stuck.

I had a 1991 Taurus SHO (manual) that did this. I'm pretty sure it wasn't the throttle assembly, but the cable would bind somewhere and it would keep the throttle open. I could never figure out where it was binding and neither could any mechanics.

I usually had to pull over to turn the car off and back on again.

The SHO accelerated very fast (at the time) so thankfully it never happened when I was facing a wall.

Just here to say that my first car was a '91 SHO, champagne/gold with the fiberglass "Power Bulge" hood. Loved that car.

I wish I had Youtube car repair videos as a kid. So many things are so much easier now that I don't have to rely on a Haynes manual with skipped steps and barely legible images.