Pretty famously, aviation incident investigations are almost always not done with prosecutorial intent, and more about truth finding. It leads to people involved being cooperative to prevent future problems instead of ass covering to prevent jail.

Aviation’s safety record is not coincidental.

▲

allthetime 7 hours ago | parent [-]

In a darker reading; strong aviation safety is mostly motivated by not killing customers. An airline or plane maker who kills more customers than others will rapidly bleed those same customers and lose them to less lethal competitors. If no one cared about dying people I imagine aviation safety wouldn’t be so impressive.

As someone else here said, software, for the most part, is a deeply unserious industry. The stakes are so comparatively low and the consequences less obvious that it’s a lot easier for companies like intuit to maintain their supremacy simply by being entrenched, having strong sales teams, and the hearts & minds of non-technical managers.

In recent times it seems Boeing has been flirting with enshitification and half-assery but critics are not quiet and not falling on deaf ears

	▲	dghlsakjg 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, fatal stuff is bad for the bottom line, but that is a vanishing minority of what gets investigated. You may not be aware, but there are thousands of non fatal incidents reported per year that just don't make the news. There is a strong culture of self reporting instilled right from basic flight training, even when there is no damage or injuries, and even when the incident would have never been noticed by the authorities. You are almost guaranteed not to face consequences if you are open and honest about an incident. The FAA openly says that they would much rather educate than punish, and they tend to do that with pilots who own their mistakes. As long as there is no intent behind the fuckup, pilots are unlikely to lose their job, let alone their license.