zlacker

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+(OP)
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?

>>fxtent+Ad
In a competitive market people hold companies "accountable" by voting with their wallets. If a tech company is producing buggy software then they should lose customers to their superior competition. If this isn't happening then lawmakers should be asking why.

>>fxtent+Ad
Forcing software to go open source would be a huge benefit so long as people can modify it and install it onto their devices.

>>fxtent+Ad
In this scenario “buggy” products would still be sold as is and EU citizens would be incentivized to purchase them, as they currently do, by circumventing EU laws or regulations on products “unfit.”