5 ms·
> Boeing is pursuing profit at the expense of human lives To play devil's advocate, this isn't a moral statement. The author is saying this is true based on ac
by brojonat 7y ago
> Boeing is pursuing profit at the expense of human lives
To play devil's advocate, this isn't a moral statement. The author is saying this is true based on actual events.
- platz 7y agoIt's retroactively true with knowledge current events, but does not answer the question 'Why did Boeing buy McDonnell-Douglas?' at that point in history with respect to "at the expense of human lives"
- throwaway2048 7y agoLets do a thought experiment, what would Boeing do about this situation if their feet weren't being held to the fire, what did they do with their initial knowledge of it?
- slededit 7y agoI'm almost certain "expense of human lives" didn't come up as a factor on any of the merger pitch decks. Frankly its a huge leap to see that a merger of two successful and relatively safe aircraft manufacturers would be intentionally at the expense of human lives.
- bashallah 7y agoNice of you to think facts only exist at the corporate level
- buddylw 7y agoIf they aren't considering human lives in the process, that may be the real problem.
- lovich 7y agoWhy would it have to be intentional? They are pursuing profit. Human lives were ended as a result of their actions in the pursuit of profit. Is that not pursuing profit at the expense of human lives?
- DuskStar 7y agoIf I drive to the store to get milk and end up getting in a fatal accident along the way, am I pursuing milk at the expense of human lives?
- wtallis 7y agoIf you weren't wearing a seatbelt, then yeah, that's a fair characterization.
- danharaj 7y agoYes. Driving is dangerous. Our society has just deemed its danger acceptable even though we know how many people die because we are so dependent on cars. This is the grim fact of the matter.
- tw04 7y agoIf you drove to the store in a car you knew had faulty brakes and killed someone: yes you would be pursuing milk at the expense of human lives. And I guarantee you if they could prove you knew your brakes were bad, the punishment would absolutely be worse than if you just had an unpreventable accident.
- bumby 7y agoThis assumes Boeing had a priori knowledge that the system would cause a crash. The fact that the system safety analysis didn't label it 'catastrophic' seems to indicate they didn't know this. This doesn't absolve them of the responsibility that they should have, or that they still didn't follow their design procedures stating redundant senaors
- tw04 7y ago“I didn’t KNOW removing three of the four brakes on my car would cause a crash” is an argument you could make. I wouldn’t want to stake my freedom on it.
- evan_ 7y agoOf course it did, but it was probably spelled differently, like “a merger would enhance our ability to fight regulation”. The regulations being things like “you have to have planes that don’t rapidly fly into the ground for no reason” etc.
- Guthur 7y agoThere are many thousands if not millions of humans involved. Successful business affects so many even far removed from the company. Large companies like these are often heavily invested by institutional investors covering many of the populations pensions.
- pytester 7y agoIt didn't have to be on any pitch decks for safety to be downplayed. Its presence or absence on pitch decks is quite irrelevant. You can tell how seriously they took human lives by their default reaction a plane crash. It's always "pilot error": https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/sd9LGK2S9m/battle_over_blame https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/sd9LGK2S9m/battle_over_blam...
- anon1m0us 7y agoInteresting. I see the same default response to accidents in self-driving cars. It's because the driver didn't have their hands on the wheel. It's because the driver fell asleep.
- OnlineGladiator 7y agoIf you're referring to Tesla's Autopilot, Tesla's legal stance has always been very clear - you are driving the car and it is your responsibility to pay attention. Now their marketing is very different and confuses people and I can understand why people would think otherwise, but Tesla has never waivered from "it's your fault, not ours" when something goes wrong. So yes, if you fall asleep or don't have your hands on the wheel while driving, it is your fault for being a shitty driver. I hate how Tesla has marketed Autopilot, but I cannot feel bad for the people stupid enough to fall asleep at the wheel.
- didbdidnd 7y agoI don’t care what is the name of your company’s department that lied to me is. Matter of fact, I don’t even care how your company is subdivided. Could be a fiefdom for all I care. But if you sell me something saying it does “X” I bloody expect “X” to mean “X” and not “not X”. But that just me, I’m old fashioned that way.
- OnlineGladiator 7y agoI'd love for Tesla to be transparent about this as well, but the onus is on the driver to understand how their car works. Maybe we need higher standards for getting a driver's license.
- pfortuny 7y ago“At whatever costs” easily becomes a moral stance even if nothing strictly immoral was supposed to be assumed.