3 ms·

Why stop at bad design? The cause for that design decision had (as often) monetary/managment reasons. So the bad design decision resulted from a bad business d

by atoav 4y ago

Why stop at bad design? The cause for that design decision had (as often) monetary/managment reasons. So the bad design decision resulted from a bad business decision, which was the result of the whole incentive structure within the company, which was the result of the way that corporation operates (has to operate?) within a capitalist environment. On another layer the regulators did not prevent the MCAS because they themselves have been influenced by economic incentives, lobbying and lack of expertise. In short: capitalism again. If we wanna live in a capitalist society that is driven by such incentives, we need to be aware that the huge resources and big incentives for corps to take shortcuts and prevent effective regulatory overssight need a powerful counterplayer that is capable of keeping these entities in check. How we go about that is a different thing, but anybody labouring under the illusion that a next MCAS could be prevented by market forces alone should go see a doctor.

tialaramex 4y ago
> The cause for that design decision had (as often) monetary/managment reasons. In the particular case of MCAS that's true, but so often it's simply thoughtless. Management aren't often given a menu of options with "Really terrible idea that might be profitable" picked from the list. People down in the trenches don't know why you should do X rather than Y and so 50-50 chance you get either, despite the differences. If you told them, "Oh, don't do Y if you can do X, here's why" they'd make better choices and we'd only be talking about cases where management actually said "Yeah, do the terrible idea, we think that would be profitable". Here's a link to P2000R4 https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2000r4.pdf https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p20... That's a paper for WG21, the C++ Committee to read, but don't worry about what it means, look at how it was rendered. A big section from pages 8 and 9 is "highlighted" by changing the text background to angry red. In the process for many people this text is rendered unreadable due to contrast problems. Nobody in "The Direction Group" is a rogue artist, here to confront us with black-on-red text as a metaphor for why it's wrong to worry about programming language safety or whatever -- just somebody clicked red in their word processor without really thinking about it and likely with no understanding of why it might be a bad idea.

by atoav 4y ago

tialaramex 4y ago

> The cause for that design decision had (as often) monetary/managment reasons. In the particular case of MCAS that's true, but so often it's simply thoughtless. Management aren't often given a menu of options with "Really terrible idea that might be profitable" picked from the list. People down in the trenches don't know why you should do X rather than Y and so 50-50 chance you get either, despite the differences. If you told them, "Oh, don't do Y if you can do X, here's why" they'd make better choices and we'd only be talking about cases where management actually said "Yeah, do the terrible idea, we think that would be profitable". Here's a link to P2000R4 https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2000r4.pdf https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p20... That's a paper for WG21, the C++ Committee to read, but don't worry about what it means, look at how it was rendered. A big section from pages 8 and 9 is "highlighted" by changing the text background to angry red. In the process for many people this text is rendered unreadable due to contrast problems. Nobody in "The Direction Group" is a rogue artist, here to confront us with black-on-red text as a metaphor for why it's wrong to worry about programming language safety or whatever -- just somebody clicked red in their word processor without really thinking about it and likely with no understanding of why it might be a bad idea.