Hacker News Reader

I agree, but that doesn't mean that the safety testing has to be done by the company.

A system where the company pays for the a 3rd independent party to do the testing is desirable IMO

But then the independent third party has an incentive on results that are in favor of the payer, i.e., the company.

not necessarily. if they get paid to do the tests whether or not it there is a positive or negative outcome, that incentive is reduced.

The choice of 3rd party should be open, transparent and done by the regulating agencies.

If you're thinking of just one round of testing this is true. But if a 3rd party tester gets a reputation for being tough then everyone tests with another tester. This creates a race to the bottom, where the is an implicit competition to get a reputation as the least stringent tester. This is essentially what happened with the credit rating agencies during the financial crisis.

you missed the part where he said choosing the tester is done by regulating authorities. That would prevent the financial ratings agency fiasco.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com