[Seenso]

> the team that worked on the space shuttle's onboard computer systems and the rigorous processes they followed to ensure correctness and safety

Those processes are expensive. It'd imagine that they're a huge political problem to maintain, giving cost-cutting pressures and the temptations of COTS [1].

[1] https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/air_s...

[nealmcb2]

Compliance with SEI CMMI Level 5 probably is expensive. While looking for more data I noted that several Boeing units are at Level 5. And I also found that between 2008 and 2019, about 12% of appraisals given across all industries and countries were at maturity levels 4 and 5, and hundreds are at Level 5 (more than Level 4), according to CMMI Institute: https://cmmiinstitute.com/resource-files/public/cmmi-adoptio...

So it all makes me wonder about the official maturity of Boeing's 737 team, and also how much that rating relates to actual software quality and safety objectives (as apparently achieved in the space shuttle work)....

[DigitalBison]

Oh totally, I can't dispute that. It's just good reading in general, but is more of a response to the grandparent comment stating "the software industry is a complete joke in terms of quality control". I think that's probably not a completely off-base assessment of quality control on average in the tech industry, but the point is it's not like no one knows how to do better; rigorous QA processes exist, but it's a huge tradeoff between cost/agility/etc and the expected cost/damage of not getting it right.

[bradknowles]

There are SEI Level 5 operations in the world. They do exist. Or at least, we've been told they do.

But they are also super expensive.

And no one has any money to spend on anything like testing or quality any more.