undefined | Better HN

0 pointsHPsquared4y ago0 comments

Overall though, I'm at least happy some individuals are getting prosecuted, it sends a message that there are legal risks to individuals involved in this kind of thing, not just diluted corporate responsibility.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

jandrese4y ago· 1 in thread

What really needs to change is the corporate culture that led a person to think that they would be doing the company a favor by lying to the regulators. This probably goes all the way to the top.

Also, whomever decided that a basic software safety check would be an optional extra with a price tag should definitely not be in the management chain. That's the sort of next quarter profit-only thinking that rots companies from the middle out. That is the kind of thinking that results in your brand new product killing 346 human beings.

jaywalk4y ago

The "software safety check" wasn't an optional extra. It didn't exist at all! The optional add on was for an "AOA DISAGREE" warning light, which would have indicated that the MCAS might be relying on faulty data (if the pilot was even aware of MCAS in the first place) but wouldn't have actually stopped it from doing so.

Now, the updated MCAS will only activate if both AOA sensors agree. Which seems like a fucking no brainer that should have been the case from the start, but... yeah.

trebligdivad4y ago· 1 in thread

Only if the people actually responsible get prosecuted; prosecuting the wrong person sneds the message that the people really responsible get away with it - so there is need for some care.

wongarsu4y ago

Even prosecuting the wrong people at least encourages whistle blowing. If someone thinks they might be the sacrificial lamb if excrement hits the fan they can protect themselves by being the first to report it to regulators

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse