7 ms·

The only remedy at this point is to hold executives financially and morally culpable. Anyone opposed to seeing the entire C-suite and board of directors having

The only remedy at this point is to hold executives financially and morally culpable. Anyone opposed to seeing the entire C-suite and board of directors having their bonuses clawed back and sent to jail? I'm not. Let the guillotine come out, I want to see heads roll.

CamperBob2 3y ago
Sounds like a great way to create an airplane company that no competent people will want to run. Might want to think through the game-theoretic consequences a bit further. For example, instead of ranting and howling about prisons and guillotines, you could point to some successful examples of other companies or orgs that have operated in a similar fashion. That might provide more productive grounds for further discussion. Any good examples? ... Yeah, I thought so.
- boredpeter 3y ago
  [dead]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- feoren 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - hyperdunc 3y ago
      It's not about "failing". Boeing lobbied for special treatment to save some cash instead of fixing a safety issue. For that, the death penalty is appropriate.
    - xvector 3y ago
      Whoa, way to twist the argument. No one is arguing for a lower salary and the death penalty. Exorbitant pay is fine if you're willing to put your life on the line for that kind of money. Plenty of people are.
- mulmen 3y ago
  > Sounds like a great way to create an airplane company that no competent people will want to run. Is it your assertion that Boeing is currently operated by competent people? They're getting crushed by SpaceX at rockets. How much more of this incompetence will it take before someone does the same to them with airliners? Relying on being "too big to fail" isn't a viable long term strategy. It only lowers the barrier to entry for competitors.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    Is it your assertion that Boeing is currently operated by competent people? Is it your assertion that they can't get any worse? Because this sounds like a good way to get worse. You know, they could be killing more than 0.5 people per ten billion passenger miles, right...?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - kegoakwpfk 3y ago
      You wouldn’t build a website with a single point of failure, yet the argument here is it’s okay to engineer things badly because of the success rate of requests is high. For air travel impacting human lives. I think it speaks to current generation of leaders avoiding thought, consideration, foresight, insight, and just using any statistic that can justify a decision. It’s a decline and one that also explains the excitement that LLMs/AI might be able to help us think less, know less, and perhaps be even less responsible for our work products.
      - habinero 3y ago
        This statement makes no sense. It has never been safer to fly, precisely because aviation is so dedicated to root cause analysis. A whole door exploded out of a plane and 1. The plane did not suffer structural damage and could land safely 2. Nobody died because seat belts are mandatory 3. The crew is drilled over and over on what to do 4. The plane has extensive monitoring and logging so RCA is easier 5. The US funds a whole org dedicated to investigating this sort of thing and the results are public and that's just the ones I can think of. This is shocking precisely because aviation is so good at this. There are multiple layers in the swiss cheese model and this somehow made it past them.
- ahepp 3y ago
  Yeah, if we did that we'd have broken sensor systems and doors falling off the plane!
- cf1241290841 3y ago
  Premeditation is the important aspect to look at i believe. It was possible to get prosecutors involved in the VW emission scandal.
givemeethekeys 3y ago
[flagged]
- kaashif 3y ago
  Could be controversial, but I am actually against rape.
- lesam 3y ago
  I appreciate that it’s a joke made to make a point, but I would prefer that the state keep prisoners safe from being raped in prison, regardless of what crime they committed.
  - HL33tibCe7 3y ago
    I'm glad someone mentioned this. The tacit acceptance of physical violence in prisons is so widespread in our society. It's weird because a comment like "these executives deserve to be raped as punishment" would be considered disgusting and unfunny: frankly, you'd probably be made a social pariah for saying something like that. That statement is morally equivalent to the "pounding in the ass prison" statement, which is far more socially acceptable. I genuinely think it's something that future generations will look back upon in horror.
junofan 3y ago
From FAA.gov: > We're responsible for the safety of civil aviation. https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/activities https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/activities Maybe the people responsible are the people who say they’re responsible?
- bobthepanda 3y ago
  The FAA gets authorized by Congress. Congress is actually the one with the constitutional power to legislate, so can override executive agencies like the grandparent describes.
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - sircastor 3y ago
      I think you could make the argument that such regulation falls under the commerce clause as interstate commerce.
      - bobthepanda 3y ago
        Flying between states is a pretty clear cut type of interstate commerce. There is also the bit about regulating transport for post. It doesn’t literally explicitly contain regulations regarding air travel, because it did not exist in the 1700s.
        phpisthebest 3y ago
        >>It doesn’t literally explicitly contain regulations regarding air travel, because it did not exist in the 1700s. If only the founders would have thought of that problem and included a method for which the constitution could be amended to grant additional powers to the federal government should the people and the states desire it... But no it is easier to just invent new powers by continual reinterpretation of the documents than actually amending the document as required
throwaway67743 3y ago
Executives are personally liable for loss of life, regardless of the law it is morally contemptible to hide behind a corporation. Until people go to jail for manslaughter this will not change.
- nimbius 3y ago
  worth noting for no particular reason China had a baby formula scandal in 2008 that led to the death of four infants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal The Intermediate People's Court in Shijiazhuang sentenced a farmer, Zhang Yujun, and a senior manager, Geng Jinping, to death in 2009. five more people received life sentences and the main company behind it went bankrupt. this was for four infant deaths. Boeing killed 189 indonesians in 2021 and executives didnt so much as take a breather at the country club between swings, so good luck. Capitalism just isnt set up to punish the Bourgeois.
  - ekianjo 3y ago
    > Capitalism just isnt set up to punish the Bourgeois. Its not a problem of capitalism its a problem of a judicial system having no balls to put execs in prison.
    - nimbius 3y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swill_milk_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swill_milk_scandal The US had one of these scandals too. nobody was arrested, no one charged. Tammany Hall politician Alderman Michael Tuomey, known as "Butcher Mike", defended the distillers vigorously throughout the scandal—in fact, he was put in charge of the Board of Health investigation. The guy basically ended all investigation and shielded all guilty parties.
      - nyokodo 3y ago
        > The US had one of these scandals too In 1850, we were in the buildup to the civil war and hadn’t even ended slavery, the political and legal environment were drastically different. I’m not suggesting there aren’t lessons to learn but the comparison is ridiculous.
ironmagma 3y ago
"Criminally," is the word you are looking for.
FridgeSeal 3y ago
Don’t just pierce the corporate veil, shred it. It’s been used to escape responsibility and shirk transparency entirely too much, and if orgs can’t be trusted with it (as they evidently cannot) then they don’t deserve to have it.
dang 3y ago
Please don't post clichés of internet indignation to Hacker News. It leads to repetitive subthreads, as in this case. That's the opposite of the curious conversation we're trying for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

CamperBob2 3y ago

Sounds like a great way to create an airplane company that no competent people will want to run. Might want to think through the game-theoretic consequences a bit further. For example, instead of ranting and howling about prisons and guillotines, you could point to some successful examples of other companies or orgs that have operated in a similar fashion. That might provide more productive grounds for further discussion. Any good examples? ... Yeah, I thought so.

boredpeter 3y ago
[dead]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
feoren 3y ago
[flagged]
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - hyperdunc 3y ago
    It's not about "failing". Boeing lobbied for special treatment to save some cash instead of fixing a safety issue. For that, the death penalty is appropriate.
  - xvector 3y ago
    Whoa, way to twist the argument. No one is arguing for a lower salary and the death penalty. Exorbitant pay is fine if you're willing to put your life on the line for that kind of money. Plenty of people are.
mulmen 3y ago
> Sounds like a great way to create an airplane company that no competent people will want to run. Is it your assertion that Boeing is currently operated by competent people? They're getting crushed by SpaceX at rockets. How much more of this incompetence will it take before someone does the same to them with airliners? Relying on being "too big to fail" isn't a viable long term strategy. It only lowers the barrier to entry for competitors.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Is it your assertion that Boeing is currently operated by competent people? Is it your assertion that they can't get any worse? Because this sounds like a good way to get worse. You know, they could be killing more than 0.5 people per ten billion passenger miles, right...?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - kegoakwpfk 3y ago
    You wouldn’t build a website with a single point of failure, yet the argument here is it’s okay to engineer things badly because of the success rate of requests is high. For air travel impacting human lives. I think it speaks to current generation of leaders avoiding thought, consideration, foresight, insight, and just using any statistic that can justify a decision. It’s a decline and one that also explains the excitement that LLMs/AI might be able to help us think less, know less, and perhaps be even less responsible for our work products.
    - habinero 3y ago
      This statement makes no sense. It has never been safer to fly, precisely because aviation is so dedicated to root cause analysis. A whole door exploded out of a plane and 1. The plane did not suffer structural damage and could land safely 2. Nobody died because seat belts are mandatory 3. The crew is drilled over and over on what to do 4. The plane has extensive monitoring and logging so RCA is easier 5. The US funds a whole org dedicated to investigating this sort of thing and the results are public and that's just the ones I can think of. This is shocking precisely because aviation is so good at this. There are multiple layers in the swiss cheese model and this somehow made it past them.
ahepp 3y ago
Yeah, if we did that we'd have broken sensor systems and doors falling off the plane!
cf1241290841 3y ago
Premeditation is the important aspect to look at i believe. It was possible to get prosecutors involved in the VW emission scandal.

givemeethekeys 3y ago

[flagged]

kaashif 3y ago
Could be controversial, but I am actually against rape.
lesam 3y ago
I appreciate that it’s a joke made to make a point, but I would prefer that the state keep prisoners safe from being raped in prison, regardless of what crime they committed.
- HL33tibCe7 3y ago
  I'm glad someone mentioned this. The tacit acceptance of physical violence in prisons is so widespread in our society. It's weird because a comment like "these executives deserve to be raped as punishment" would be considered disgusting and unfunny: frankly, you'd probably be made a social pariah for saying something like that. That statement is morally equivalent to the "pounding in the ass prison" statement, which is far more socially acceptable. I genuinely think it's something that future generations will look back upon in horror.

junofan 3y ago

From FAA.gov: > We're responsible for the safety of civil aviation. https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/activities https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/activities Maybe the people responsible are the people who say they’re responsible?

bobthepanda 3y ago
The FAA gets authorized by Congress. Congress is actually the one with the constitutional power to legislate, so can override executive agencies like the grandparent describes.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - sircastor 3y ago
    I think you could make the argument that such regulation falls under the commerce clause as interstate commerce.
    - bobthepanda 3y ago
      Flying between states is a pretty clear cut type of interstate commerce. There is also the bit about regulating transport for post. It doesn’t literally explicitly contain regulations regarding air travel, because it did not exist in the 1700s.
      - phpisthebest 3y ago
        >>It doesn’t literally explicitly contain regulations regarding air travel, because it did not exist in the 1700s. If only the founders would have thought of that problem and included a method for which the constitution could be amended to grant additional powers to the federal government should the people and the states desire it... But no it is easier to just invent new powers by continual reinterpretation of the documents than actually amending the document as required

throwaway67743 3y ago

Executives are personally liable for loss of life, regardless of the law it is morally contemptible to hide behind a corporation. Until people go to jail for manslaughter this will not change.

nimbius 3y ago
worth noting for no particular reason China had a baby formula scandal in 2008 that led to the death of four infants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal The Intermediate People's Court in Shijiazhuang sentenced a farmer, Zhang Yujun, and a senior manager, Geng Jinping, to death in 2009. five more people received life sentences and the main company behind it went bankrupt. this was for four infant deaths. Boeing killed 189 indonesians in 2021 and executives didnt so much as take a breather at the country club between swings, so good luck. Capitalism just isnt set up to punish the Bourgeois.
- ekianjo 3y ago
  > Capitalism just isnt set up to punish the Bourgeois. Its not a problem of capitalism its a problem of a judicial system having no balls to put execs in prison.
  - nimbius 3y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swill_milk_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swill_milk_scandal The US had one of these scandals too. nobody was arrested, no one charged. Tammany Hall politician Alderman Michael Tuomey, known as "Butcher Mike", defended the distillers vigorously throughout the scandal—in fact, he was put in charge of the Board of Health investigation. The guy basically ended all investigation and shielded all guilty parties.
    - nyokodo 3y ago
      > The US had one of these scandals too In 1850, we were in the buildup to the civil war and hadn’t even ended slavery, the political and legal environment were drastically different. I’m not suggesting there aren’t lessons to learn but the comparison is ridiculous.

ironmagma 3y ago

"Criminally," is the word you are looking for.

FridgeSeal 3y ago

Don’t just pierce the corporate veil, shred it. It’s been used to escape responsibility and shirk transparency entirely too much, and if orgs can’t be trusted with it (as they evidently cannot) then they don’t deserve to have it.

dang 3y ago

Please don't post clichés of internet indignation to Hacker News. It leads to repetitive subthreads, as in this case. That's the opposite of the curious conversation we're trying for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html