I completely agree. At the some point, businesses need to to have reason to say "no, what you want is feasible, and we won't risk the consequences of failure."

For safety critical applications, technical decision makers need to have reason to say "no, we can't do this, and we won't because my career and possibly freedom are at stake if we do."

Right now a huge portion of the risk of software failure to software builders is reputational. This can be sufficient, as pointed out in many cases in the article, but as we see in these examples is often not.

Procrastination is usually desired, for timely completion, and almost always rewarded, for the same.

I wonder if you'd like to pay for developing software that comes with full liability :)