4 ms·
No lawyers are dumb enough to want less safe commercial planes.
by tycho-newman 3y ago
No lawyers are dumb enough to want less safe commercial planes.
- nehal3m 3y agoI can easily imagine them to be greedy enough though.
- salawat 3y agoCorrection: No lawyer is dumb enough to go on the record, or to leave a signature on something that could reasonably create the impression upon discovery that they knowingly want or facilitated the creation of, less safe commercial planes. However, buying Boeing stock, with the current management in place, is synonymous with wanting less safe commercial planes.
- bumby 3y agoThis was glaringly obvious where I took a course on engineering law. So much boiled down to “don’t put bad stuff in writing” more than “don’t do bad stuff in the first place.” The press or made a point to distinguish the way engineers think can get them in legal trouble (eg, trying to be open and transparent about design flaws). It kinda bummed me out.
- throwawaymaths 3y agoI wouldn't do it, but. I think it's not crazy to buy Boeing stock in the belief that they will figure their shit out and start building safer planes.
- WalterBright 3y agoIt is? Boeing stock is half the value it was before the MAX crashes.
- aeternum 3y agoThat's never the proposal but is often the outcome. Firing your engineers and outsourcing or eliminating large amounts of QA most would agree was likely to make Boeing planes less safe. Yet no lawyer raised an objection. They lawyers also successfully argued that FAA testing was not needed and Boeing can and should be trusted to signoff internally. There are lots of ways to justify.