[vidarh]

I don't really think your comment contradicts the comment you reply to - as you point out one way of addressing the failure to meet building codes is to make those communities safe.

But just defining their around the lack of safety is a poor option. It's hard to tell from the article whether they just worked around the bureaucracy without fixing the issues or if they made it safe in non-standard ways too. And so everyone would probably be better served if there was a process for handling exceptions that actually assessed and documented that a non-standard method was used and that someone signed it off as safe enough, so that ambiguity wasn't there.

(And the world of Neuromancer isn't one I'd like to live in, as much as I loved reading about it)