The scale of sunk-cost fallacy here just seems comical. Assuming you didn't want to just scrap or major-refit the planes entirely, presumably the right answer

The scale of sunk-cost fallacy here just seems comical. Assuming you didn't want to just scrap or major-refit the planes entirely, presumably the right answer was to back away from the "We'll make it the same type rating." Then you can probably discard the MCAS system, which regardless of its technical merits is a hopelessly damaged brand. I get that there was some financial penalty attached to that strategy, but I have to imagine they long ago sailed past that cost in settlements, reputational damage, and cancelled orders. It's not like this is going to buy back their reputation either. People don't want to see legal loopholes and "here's a patch fix you can bolt on the side and it really fixes it, we're sure, honest, trust us." They want some obvious and grand gesture to help restore trust, like "we're ripping out the Fly Into The Ocean mechanism and retraining every pilot that walks within three kilometres of these planes at our own colossal expense." Of course, my opinion of Boeing has been undermined since mid-Pandemic; they have a factory nearby and every day there was a huge cluster of employees protesting the vaccination mandates. At this point, I'd feel more confident in an Tupolev product.