I would argue the outcome of setting up a perverse incentive structure and failing to hire QA is pretty damn predictable, so that's entirely consistent with what I said :)

On a more serious note, I'm not saying "just make programmers liable for the code they write", and leave it at that. I'm saying that, when you sell a piece of software, someone needs to sign-off on that software being fit for purpose. It's that someone who's ultimately liable. Absent some explicit firebreak, that sign-off implicitly happens with the CTO or CEO.