This article contemplates software quality, likening its degradation to a "death by a thousand cuts." It posits that quality is the experience of the process, emphasizing performing tasks with grace and leaving things better than found.

Software products, unlike other machines, are pure concept, making them infinitely malleable. While some software aims for "finished-ness" like Unix tools or ZeroMQ, most must evolve indefinitely to match a changing world. The Emacs editor, continuously evolving since 1976, exemplifies this dynamic. The accelerating pace of change, especially with AI, necessitates algorithms that adapt and revise themselves.

Responsibility for software quality assurance is broad, extending beyond traditional QA to product managers, customer success, sales, marketing, and even CEOs. Scenarios like app failures despite performant frameworks, features nobody uses, or rushed updates with costly rollbacks illustrate how various functions contribute to perceived "bad quality." The author argues that a linear workflow, common in software development, front-loads risk and delays feedback, increasing the likelihood of compounding errors and "software debt."

Ultimately, assuring product quality is a shared responsibility across all functions involved in its lifecycle. The traditional linear model, with its inherent feedback delays and compounding risks, is contrasted with a more integrated approach where every role contributes to the product's health.