@david_chisnall@infosec.exchange blame flows to the least powerful, who knows every reason to stay silent. Aviation proved it clearly. "Pilot error" as a standard finding suppressed reporting until NASA's blame-free ASRS launched in 1976 and reports surged. That's because blame culture buries failures. I never, ever require a fix for a bug report, similarly. In 2017 I personally, at great cost, flipped MongoDB from a couple of CVE a year to tens of thousands of secret defects triaged and dozens of public CVE. Eliminated blame, created transparent CNA. You say tools that "cannot be used safely in those contexts." That says defect claim to me. A product that cannot be used safely as advertised is defective in its advertising, and saying so puts the vendor on the spot. It is hard and it is also the only thing that has ever worked. We don't go to the moon because it is easy. Placing accountability on the victim who cannot inspect the model makes the lie free to tell. That's the whole Elon Musk snake oil pyramid. His buyers are dispersed and cannot verify claims, which is the entire premise of false advertising law. Liability sits with the cheapest cost avoider (Calabresi, 1970). Assumption of risk was the tobacco defence too for forty years: smokers chose, smokers knew. Smoker liability never produced a smoker lobby. The 1998 settlement after 10s of millions died came from state attorneys general suing the manufacturers. Driver blame ran the auto industry from the 1920s until 1966. Drivers never organised against the design. The Motor Vehicle Safety Act came from putting the flawed designs on trial. A Miami jury just did what I have been talking about for over a decade. $243 million against Tesla in August 2025 for Autopilot design failure, $200 million of it punitive. It shouldn't have taken so long after 2015 immediately revealed the Tesla defects in AI.