> It's unlikely that actual people weren't hurt because of these bugs.

Do you want criminal prosecution for actual harm, or for potential harm?

America has this habit of reaching for the biggest gun it has to solve problems, or make a statement.

It always backfires.

> Do you want criminal prosecution for actual harm, or for potential harm?

Do you only want DUI to be illegal if it results in an accident?

Then who do we crucify as a criminal for HeartBleed? Or Spectre? Gosh, the potential harm those could have done!

Nobody. None of those have any such obvious signs of negligence.

Criminal reports for negligence that can cause death are a thing around the world.

Pray tell, how would it backfire to make sure emergency services are always available ?

They are scared that such standards would then be applied to their work.

After reading their other comments I think they’re more of the mindset of “regulations mean higher cost and I don’t want to pay more to meet standards I don’t immediately care about“

You're speaking in generalities that can hardly even be mapped to the situation at hand. What, specifically, are you saying is the correct recourse here? What are you saying would go wrong if Google were prosecuted for intentionally shipping a nonfunctional emergency feature?