5 ms·

This kind of degeneracy (normalisation of deviance[0]) is systemic. Expect problems to crop up in Boeing's weapons too sooner or later. I hope the US air force

by aredox 3y ago

This kind of degeneracy (normalisation of deviance[0]) is systemic. Expect problems to crop up in Boeing's weapons too sooner or later. I hope the US air force didn't let Boeing self-certify its products as much as the FAA did. [0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalization_of_deviance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalization_of_deviance

jvm___ 3y ago
Enshitification
- rurban 3y ago
  McDonaldification rather. After their management took over Boeing, it went downhill.
  - ranger207 3y ago
    Same root cause
  - rurban 3y ago
    Sorry about the spelling error. "McDonellification"
ghc 3y ago
By law, Boeing must pay the USG for the USG to test and certify equipment produced for the government at one of many test ranges throughout the country. Exactly because companies can't be trusted to meet their contractual obligations. See https://www.test-evaluation.osd.mil https://www.test-evaluation.osd.mil for more info.
- dahart 3y ago
  Same is true of their non-government products; planes have to be inspected and certified by the FAA for the same reason. Unfortunately, regulatory capture is preventing some of the proper checks and balances.
  - daveguy 3y ago
    Regulatory capture generally refers to putting up onerous and unnecessary regulations as a moat around a product or service. I think you're referring to the weakening/dismantling of regulatory requirements and enforcement favored by libertarians. Please correct me if I've misunderstood. Edit: Personally I think valid and helpful regulatory frameworks can easily drift into capture territory, so they must be vigilantly maintained. Also to keep incentives in alignment, the regulators shouldn't be able to jump back and forth between industry and regulation. Dismantling them, however, is worse. Like a long standing code base there's a lot of useful but misunderstood parts.
    - dahart 3y ago
      I’m not familiar with the meaning you’ve suggested. Can you provide supporting evidence for that definition? The only meaning I know for the phrase “Regulatory Capture” refers to the corruption of regulatory oversight by special interests. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp https://study.com/academy/lesson/regulatory-capture-definition-theory.html https://study.com/academy/lesson/regulatory-capture-definiti... https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100411608 https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority...
      - daveguy 3y ago
        From your first link. > ...occurs when a political entity, policymaker, or regulator is co-opted to serve the commercial, ideological, or political interests of a minor constituency, such as a particular geographic area, industry, profession, or ideological group. My description was just more succinct and didn't identify every single entity that could be coopted and every single group that could benefit. Regulatory capture is unnecessary and onerous checks and balances, not the removal of regulatory checks and balances that you implied.
        dahart 3y ago
mihaaly 3y ago
Luckily for them (military) dying of their own is more of a common thing than in passenger traffic. As well as secrecy of troublesome matters (e.g. weaknesses and vulnerability). Business as usual may carry on.
- mihaaly 3y ago
  ... observing the few downvotes I have the feeling that I offended the sensitive patriotic hearts believing I had negative words on the beloved military. While in fact I had negative words on Boeing management, that they can abuse the inherent nature of military customers further and can carry on building crappy products blaming faults on the risky profession of home protecting soldiers. I felt like I had to clarify this before causing too much damage with my carelessly phrased sentences...
  - xxpor 3y ago
    When was the last time the AF lost a tanker?
    - mihaaly 3y ago
      Why tanker specifically? Which specific failiure mode of which specific component in the past was indicator in military use equipment for Boeing's present organizational f ups with the potential of future consequences?
      - xxpor 3y ago
        The KC-46 shitshow was what I was thinking of.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
delfinom 3y ago
Eh Boeing has been having issues delivering Air Force contracts already. They fucked up QC on KC-46s so bad that the air force was basically getting free planes after fines were levied. The Air Force is different than airlines in the fact they basically tear down the plane after receiving it to inspect it. They found all kinds of shit like fucking wrenches left in the wall. It's gotten so bad that Boeing announced they will no longer accept fixed price contracts from the military because they are that broken as a company and no longer able to manage anything.
- xenonite 3y ago
  “B company” ;) Similar story: Bombardier trains in Switzerland. The defects required Bombardier to not only fix, but deliver several extra trains for free.
- xnzakg 3y ago
  Thought you were joking about the wrenches part but apparently it's true? https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/04/02/air-force-again-halts-kc-46-deliveries-after-more-debris-found/ https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/04/02...
lamontcg 3y ago
Obligatory youtube video on the normalization of deviance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljzj9Msli5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljzj9Msli5o

by aredox 3y ago

jvm___ 3y ago

Enshitification

rurban 3y ago
McDonaldification rather. After their management took over Boeing, it went downhill.
- ranger207 3y ago
  Same root cause
- rurban 3y ago
  Sorry about the spelling error. "McDonellification"

ghc 3y ago

By law, Boeing must pay the USG for the USG to test and certify equipment produced for the government at one of many test ranges throughout the country. Exactly because companies can't be trusted to meet their contractual obligations. See https://www.test-evaluation.osd.mil https://www.test-evaluation.osd.mil for more info.

dahart 3y ago
Same is true of their non-government products; planes have to be inspected and certified by the FAA for the same reason. Unfortunately, regulatory capture is preventing some of the proper checks and balances.
- daveguy 3y ago
  Regulatory capture generally refers to putting up onerous and unnecessary regulations as a moat around a product or service. I think you're referring to the weakening/dismantling of regulatory requirements and enforcement favored by libertarians. Please correct me if I've misunderstood. Edit: Personally I think valid and helpful regulatory frameworks can easily drift into capture territory, so they must be vigilantly maintained. Also to keep incentives in alignment, the regulators shouldn't be able to jump back and forth between industry and regulation. Dismantling them, however, is worse. Like a long standing code base there's a lot of useful but misunderstood parts.
  - dahart 3y ago
    I’m not familiar with the meaning you’ve suggested. Can you provide supporting evidence for that definition? The only meaning I know for the phrase “Regulatory Capture” refers to the corruption of regulatory oversight by special interests. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp https://study.com/academy/lesson/regulatory-capture-definition-theory.html https://study.com/academy/lesson/regulatory-capture-definiti... https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100411608 https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority...
    - daveguy 3y ago
      From your first link. > ...occurs when a political entity, policymaker, or regulator is co-opted to serve the commercial, ideological, or political interests of a minor constituency, such as a particular geographic area, industry, profession, or ideological group. My description was just more succinct and didn't identify every single entity that could be coopted and every single group that could benefit. Regulatory capture is unnecessary and onerous checks and balances, not the removal of regulatory checks and balances that you implied.
      - dahart 3y ago

mihaaly 3y ago

Luckily for them (military) dying of their own is more of a common thing than in passenger traffic. As well as secrecy of troublesome matters (e.g. weaknesses and vulnerability). Business as usual may carry on.

mihaaly 3y ago
... observing the few downvotes I have the feeling that I offended the sensitive patriotic hearts believing I had negative words on the beloved military. While in fact I had negative words on Boeing management, that they can abuse the inherent nature of military customers further and can carry on building crappy products blaming faults on the risky profession of home protecting soldiers. I felt like I had to clarify this before causing too much damage with my carelessly phrased sentences...
- xxpor 3y ago
  When was the last time the AF lost a tanker?
  - mihaaly 3y ago
    Why tanker specifically? Which specific failiure mode of which specific component in the past was indicator in military use equipment for Boeing's present organizational f ups with the potential of future consequences?
    - xxpor 3y ago
      The KC-46 shitshow was what I was thinking of.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

delfinom 3y ago

Eh Boeing has been having issues delivering Air Force contracts already. They fucked up QC on KC-46s so bad that the air force was basically getting free planes after fines were levied. The Air Force is different than airlines in the fact they basically tear down the plane after receiving it to inspect it. They found all kinds of shit like fucking wrenches left in the wall. It's gotten so bad that Boeing announced they will no longer accept fixed price contracts from the military because they are that broken as a company and no longer able to manage anything.

xenonite 3y ago
“B company” ;) Similar story: Bombardier trains in Switzerland. The defects required Bombardier to not only fix, but deliver several extra trains for free.
xnzakg 3y ago
Thought you were joking about the wrenches part but apparently it's true? https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/04/02/air-force-again-halts-kc-46-deliveries-after-more-debris-found/ https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/04/02...

lamontcg 3y ago

Obligatory youtube video on the normalization of deviance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljzj9Msli5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljzj9Msli5o