5 ms·

The logic follows that if a malicious company deliberately subcontracts all their development, then they've completely indemnified themselves against all claims

by ethbro 7y ago

The logic follows that if a malicious company deliberately subcontracts all their development, then they've completely indemnified themselves against all claims. While simultaneously providing no opportunity for subcontractors to bring noticed issues to their attention. Which seems a pretty bad state of affairs to trust when building things like airplanes.

luckydata 7y ago
It is. that's why strong labor laws protect everyone, not just the workers, and why well run Unions are so fundamental to the sustainability of an economy.
throwaheyy 7y ago
That is why high risk industries have regulators like the FAA instead of just relying on the fear of liability. In terms of liability, Boeing can try push it to the subbies and the subbies can try and push it back to Boeing. Both are trying to bamboozle the non-technical lawyers. The purpose of the FAA is to cut through that crap and enforce actual, effective change through sanctions or otherwise, and they didn’t do that. That’s what fell apart here.
- to11mtm 7y ago
  To wit: In my state, Gambling is legalized. I remember my surprise when a friend who worked in the compliance side of the business actually knew what MD5 was (Back in 2007.) She wasn't a 'technical' person either. She explained that they actually had to audit the slot machines to make sure that the code running on them had a hash that matched a codebase that had been audited and approved by the state regulatory body. So, the practice for auditing code by a regulatory body is nothing new. If we do it for money, FFS can we do it when there are actual lives involved?
  - forgetfulusr 7y ago
    Someone weighed that the short-term money here was better than long-term. I think that quarterly earnings reports is the wrong optimization for some industries. If only the execs at Boeing could imagine each of their planes carrying suitcases of their Bonuses.
- jdkee 7y ago
  As for the FAA, they appear to be in the throes of regulatory capture on this issue. https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/23/regulatory-capture-may-be-responsible-for-boeings-recent-problems https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/23/regulatory-cap...

by ethbro 7y ago

luckydata 7y ago

It is. that's why strong labor laws protect everyone, not just the workers, and why well run Unions are so fundamental to the sustainability of an economy.

throwaheyy 7y ago

That is why high risk industries have regulators like the FAA instead of just relying on the fear of liability. In terms of liability, Boeing can try push it to the subbies and the subbies can try and push it back to Boeing. Both are trying to bamboozle the non-technical lawyers. The purpose of the FAA is to cut through that crap and enforce actual, effective change through sanctions or otherwise, and they didn’t do that. That’s what fell apart here.

to11mtm 7y ago
To wit: In my state, Gambling is legalized. I remember my surprise when a friend who worked in the compliance side of the business actually knew what MD5 was (Back in 2007.) She wasn't a 'technical' person either. She explained that they actually had to audit the slot machines to make sure that the code running on them had a hash that matched a codebase that had been audited and approved by the state regulatory body. So, the practice for auditing code by a regulatory body is nothing new. If we do it for money, FFS can we do it when there are actual lives involved?
- forgetfulusr 7y ago
  Someone weighed that the short-term money here was better than long-term. I think that quarterly earnings reports is the wrong optimization for some industries. If only the execs at Boeing could imagine each of their planes carrying suitcases of their Bonuses.
jdkee 7y ago
As for the FAA, they appear to be in the throes of regulatory capture on this issue. https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/23/regulatory-capture-may-be-responsible-for-boeings-recent-problems https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/23/regulatory-cap...