[umvi]

I agree that cars are more safe now than ever before and that mechanical failure is more deadly than software failure.

The whole point of my comment was to put to bed the irrational fear of flying. You are still more safe travelling long distances in a faulty flight system such as the MAX than you are by car. There are just too variables to account for in cars, one of which includes increased software complexity.

[CydeWeys]

The 737 MAX crashed twice and killed 346 people. It's not an "irrational fear" to refuse to ever fly in one again.

Secondly, what are the exact figures you're using to show that the 737 MAX is safer than cars? And now compare it to other planes, the more realistic comparison? I'm not taking planes to places that are within driving distance. The 737 MAX was waaaay less safe than other planes.

[bumby]

I think we have to stop segmenting our thoughts into “software” and “hardware” and instead look at issues like the 737 Max as an integrated system failure. “Software” failures can easily manifest themselves into hardware failures; thinking of them as separate systems can lead to a complacency mindset of “its just software so we don’t have to be as rigorous in our design”

[Gibbon1]

> integrated system failure

I agree with you, that's exactly what it was. All of the components worked as designed. But it's pissing against the wind on HN to say that.