zlacker

>>zolbre+(OP)
Does anyone know who is lobbying for the CRA? I don't believe for a second that technologically clueless lawmakers originated the proposed law. There must be some group that intends to benefit financially from this.

>>hgs3+Ik
I believe this represents roughly what people want, which is that in the future you can hold the makers of gadgets financially accountable for security issues. The "problem" with open source is that you can also hold people accountable who are regularly being paid for open source work. But I believe it needs to be that way, or else what would stop a Chinese gadget maker from turning the buggy parts of their firmware open source to circumvent the new law?