8 ms·

I think the comments here say more about us as an audience than they do about the Airbus. We're totally accustomed to hardware & software problems whose solutio

I think the comments here say more about us as an audience than they do about the Airbus. We're totally accustomed to hardware & software problems whose solution is, "just restart it," and we don't even find it all that disturbing - mostly just humorous. Our standards as developers & testers have gotten pretty low. I think the only way you'd see outrage here at HN is if the restart involved a real physical crash (as opposed to a software one) and the loss of human lives. Otherwise, we're all, "meh."

AuthorizedCust 7y ago
That's not necessarily a "low" standard. It's that the value of preventing a reboot every few days is much lower than other things we could spend our time on. Mandatory oftware perfection would be a huge drag on valuable new features.
- pcurve 7y ago
  I agree with you to a certain degree but appropriateness of the trade off should really depend on where the software is used. Airplane, powerplants, and train signaling systems? I would want longer uptime.
- cm2187 7y ago
  Especially when you compare that to all the other maintenance that has to happen routinely on a plane for it to remain safe. Not a reason to not fix it though.
- 420codebro 7y ago
  Excuse me for this: But that is a heinously horseshit answer. This isn't some app on your iPhone to find someone to fuck. We are talking about an airliner with many souls on board. Taking extra time to prevent a periodic reboot due to an unexplained / unresolved issue is the norm in these use cases (life critical systems). Please don't ever work on anything life critical - your attitude is completely incompatible.
jakobegger 7y ago
The thing here is that the issue is well understood and the root cause is known. We know that rebooting prevents the error. The problem is when "have you tried rebooting" becomes the first troubleshooting step and you stop investigating. But if you realise after the investigation that a reboot reliably prevents the issue, it's a worthwhile approach, especially if fixing the error would require many complicated changes that may lead to further errors.
briandear 7y ago
> I think the only way you'd see outrage here at HN is if the restart involved a real physical crash Or if it were an American company. There wasn’t any outrage when Germanwings’s lack of attention to their suicidal pilot’s mental health even though there were significant warning signs before he crashed a plane into the Alps. Little outrage over Malaysian Air despite their pilot practicing his suicidal crash in the simulator months before. But for an American company, out come the pitchforks. The fact that Airbus hasn’t yet had a 350 crash is just happy luck, but the issues are still just as outrage worthy. Where is the rage against the EASA that allowed such a glitch to pass certification? Where are the complaints against EASA outsourcing certification tasks[1] as the FAA was criticized about? If this were an American company, you’d see plenty of outrage here and it would be related to some flavor of the United States not being leftist enough. (i.e. having lower regulatory strictness, lower taxes and thus an “undersized” bureaucracy. There is an undeniable and distinct anti-American sentiment on HN when it comes to issues like this. From everything such as climate, economic policies, consumer issues, defense, and even food and housing choices of Americans, the US always seems to be held in a persistant, low-level contempt, while almost anything European or Japanese gets a positive initial reaction. This might be a controversial opinion around here, but it’s my perception after being around the HN community for almost 7 years and watching it change from a place that celebrates entrepreneurship, business and capitalism to little more than a better moderated subreddit for those that view American startups and technology with derision and contempt. Actual Marxism ideas get upvoted and free market ideas get downvoted. Which is ironic because Marxism didn’t create anything that keeps many of us highly compensated while working on cool technology. This forum itself wouldn’t even exist were it not for a venture capital firm. Most of the tech stack we all use comes from entrepreneurship and innovation from the free market. Since Airbus is essentially a state-owned enterprise in the practical sense, of course it isn’t going to result in any outrage — or at least not more than one of those dirty, evil, profit-oriented American corporations. [1] https://etendering.ted.europa.eu//cft/cft-display.html?cftId=2741 https://etendering.ted.europa.eu//cft/cft-display.html?cftId...
- P_I_Staker 7y ago
  Both of the examples you gave were of mental health issues, which we're shitty at handling as a society. I've seen multiple posts on reddit about people "glamorizing" mental health problems, when really they're just more comfortable openly talking about it. People still just don't want to hear it. We don't see these problems as real issues to be dealt with as a society. There's still widespread belief that these are personal failings. People need to shut up about it and get on with their life. Otherwise, we need to identify these people so we can avoid them. Your claim that American companies are getting the shaft is complete nonsense. It's classic US conservative insanity. It is not a shock, nor is it anti-American bias, that concious engineering decisions which result in loss of life get more scrutiny and outrage. There was plenty of outrage for the VW emissions scandle. Here, not only has there not been any deaths, but an update's been provided. If you seriously think there will be no outrage for a european engineering disaster here, you're crazy.
jsight 7y ago
Or maybe it is a testament to how high our standards are that the expectation is that we should essentially never have to restart things. I can't say that my car has ever gone 149 hours without a "reboot" of some kind or another.
- magduf 7y ago
  Mine sure has, and just about every car these days does. The ECU doesn't lose power when you turn off the car; the only way to "reboot" your car is to disconnect the battery.
ungzd 7y ago
> Our standards as developers & testers have gotten pretty low. It's just an unsolved problem. No one never knew how to write complex robust software. Even with memory-safe languages. Even with advanced type systems, generative tests, immutability and advanced concurrency primitives. And it's not a discipline problem.
logiclogic 7y ago
It is an issue if they have to reboot it twice.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

AuthorizedCust 7y ago

That's not necessarily a "low" standard. It's that the value of preventing a reboot every few days is much lower than other things we could spend our time on. Mandatory oftware perfection would be a huge drag on valuable new features.

pcurve 7y ago
I agree with you to a certain degree but appropriateness of the trade off should really depend on where the software is used. Airplane, powerplants, and train signaling systems? I would want longer uptime.
cm2187 7y ago
Especially when you compare that to all the other maintenance that has to happen routinely on a plane for it to remain safe. Not a reason to not fix it though.
420codebro 7y ago
Excuse me for this: But that is a heinously horseshit answer. This isn't some app on your iPhone to find someone to fuck. We are talking about an airliner with many souls on board. Taking extra time to prevent a periodic reboot due to an unexplained / unresolved issue is the norm in these use cases (life critical systems). Please don't ever work on anything life critical - your attitude is completely incompatible.

jakobegger 7y ago

The thing here is that the issue is well understood and the root cause is known. We know that rebooting prevents the error. The problem is when "have you tried rebooting" becomes the first troubleshooting step and you stop investigating. But if you realise after the investigation that a reboot reliably prevents the issue, it's a worthwhile approach, especially if fixing the error would require many complicated changes that may lead to further errors.

briandear 7y ago

> I think the only way you'd see outrage here at HN is if the restart involved a real physical crash Or if it were an American company. There wasn’t any outrage when Germanwings’s lack of attention to their suicidal pilot’s mental health even though there were significant warning signs before he crashed a plane into the Alps. Little outrage over Malaysian Air despite their pilot practicing his suicidal crash in the simulator months before. But for an American company, out come the pitchforks. The fact that Airbus hasn’t yet had a 350 crash is just happy luck, but the issues are still just as outrage worthy. Where is the rage against the EASA that allowed such a glitch to pass certification? Where are the complaints against EASA outsourcing certification tasks[1] as the FAA was criticized about? If this were an American company, you’d see plenty of outrage here and it would be related to some flavor of the United States not being leftist enough. (i.e. having lower regulatory strictness, lower taxes and thus an “undersized” bureaucracy. There is an undeniable and distinct anti-American sentiment on HN when it comes to issues like this. From everything such as climate, economic policies, consumer issues, defense, and even food and housing choices of Americans, the US always seems to be held in a persistant, low-level contempt, while almost anything European or Japanese gets a positive initial reaction. This might be a controversial opinion around here, but it’s my perception after being around the HN community for almost 7 years and watching it change from a place that celebrates entrepreneurship, business and capitalism to little more than a better moderated subreddit for those that view American startups and technology with derision and contempt. Actual Marxism ideas get upvoted and free market ideas get downvoted. Which is ironic because Marxism didn’t create anything that keeps many of us highly compensated while working on cool technology. This forum itself wouldn’t even exist were it not for a venture capital firm. Most of the tech stack we all use comes from entrepreneurship and innovation from the free market. Since Airbus is essentially a state-owned enterprise in the practical sense, of course it isn’t going to result in any outrage — or at least not more than one of those dirty, evil, profit-oriented American corporations. [1] https://etendering.ted.europa.eu//cft/cft-display.html?cftId=2741 https://etendering.ted.europa.eu//cft/cft-display.html?cftId...

P_I_Staker 7y ago
Both of the examples you gave were of mental health issues, which we're shitty at handling as a society. I've seen multiple posts on reddit about people "glamorizing" mental health problems, when really they're just more comfortable openly talking about it. People still just don't want to hear it. We don't see these problems as real issues to be dealt with as a society. There's still widespread belief that these are personal failings. People need to shut up about it and get on with their life. Otherwise, we need to identify these people so we can avoid them. Your claim that American companies are getting the shaft is complete nonsense. It's classic US conservative insanity. It is not a shock, nor is it anti-American bias, that concious engineering decisions which result in loss of life get more scrutiny and outrage. There was plenty of outrage for the VW emissions scandle. Here, not only has there not been any deaths, but an update's been provided. If you seriously think there will be no outrage for a european engineering disaster here, you're crazy.

jsight 7y ago

Or maybe it is a testament to how high our standards are that the expectation is that we should essentially never have to restart things. I can't say that my car has ever gone 149 hours without a "reboot" of some kind or another.

magduf 7y ago
Mine sure has, and just about every car these days does. The ECU doesn't lose power when you turn off the car; the only way to "reboot" your car is to disconnect the battery.

ungzd 7y ago

> Our standards as developers & testers have gotten pretty low. It's just an unsolved problem. No one never knew how to write complex robust software. Even with memory-safe languages. Even with advanced type systems, generative tests, immutability and advanced concurrency primitives. And it's not a discipline problem.

logiclogic 7y ago

It is an issue if they have to reboot it twice.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]