Just to remind everyone, the Boeing 737 MAX problem was not a software problem. You can blame people's obsession with global warming more than you can blame software.
The feature of the 737 MAX's design is greater fuel efficiency. This meant using a larger engine ("larger" meaning physical size, not power). The larger engine wouldn't fit under the wing, so they had to mount it forward of the wing. 
At this point, you now had a fulcrum bug: moving the engine up and forward meant the engine would cause the plane to pitch upward. This could cause the plane to "stall". A stall is very bad and would cause many crashes.
To fix this, they had a stall sensor that would detect the condition, and automatically pitch the nose back down to prevent the stall. Only, they relied upon a single sensor, and if gave erroneous readings, it would incorrectly pitch the nose down causing a crash.
Which it did. Twice.
But there was no bug in the software. It wasn't acting erroneously. Instead, it was the sensors giving erroneous data, and a design flaw placing the engines in a more dangerous configuration.
People are describing Boeing's fix as a software fix. Yes, they are changing the software, but that doesn't mean there was a software problem. Instead, it's a design change, which is reflected in a software change. They are adding a sensor, and doing less to override pilots.
It's like blaming doctors whenever a sick patient dies. The doctor in this case is the software, trying to overcome flaws, working precisely as designed.
Now, software as a whole does have bugs where it performs other than how the programmer intended. This is a different set of concerns. Confusing one with the other helps if you are pushing some sort of political agenda, but it has no technical merit.
