6 ms·
Such decisions are way above the pay grade of random engineers
by WinstonSmith84 2y ago
Such decisions are way above the pay grade of random engineers
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y agoNever forget Kareem Serageldin - the one person who went to jail for the 2007 financial crisis. In fairness, he was an exec making $7M per year - so not a nobody, but he was only managing 70 people (Credit Suisse was a ~50k person company), and obviously not the only person who should've went to jail.
- sgammon 2y agoA systemic failure doesn't necessarily mean that people should go to jail; Kareem lied about the price of bonds and deserved jail time.
- underlipton 2y agoEveryone lied about the price of bonds, that's why our major investment banks still exist (though, I suppose CS doesn't at this point; that's another story).
- sgammon 2y agoWhat is your point? (1) That others should have gone to jail too, or that (2) Kareem was only doing what everyone else was doing? For (1), were other people prosecuted? Maybe there was insufficient evidence or process issues that got in the way of additional convictions. For (2), how does that excuse a crime? Kareem's story is fascinating for many reasons and I don't find lying about bond prices to be a crime to hate someone over. But, a crime it is, nonetheless.
- Dylan16807 2y agoThe point that was made earlier in the thread is definitely 1. If there was insufficient evidence in every other case, then that's a massive systemic problem we need to fix. And I can't think of any "process issue" that would cause this particular outcome other than "massive corruption".
- lupusreal 2y agoWhether to do something you know is morally wrong or refuse and quit is always your pay grade. And don't give me the Yuppie Nuremberg Defense. "I was just following orders... because I've got a mortgage!" That doesn't fly when lives are on the line.
- tsunamifury 2y agoI think people seem to have a very romantic notion that there is some meeting where all the engineers get together and decide whether or not they are going to kill their users or not.
- bumby 2y agoNot to "kill their users" but they realistically have meeting to vote on whether the system is "go/nogo". This is the basic structure of many aerospace designs. If you ever watch a rocket launch, they are literally checking in with every system owner for that decision. Prior to even getting to the launch date, there are meetings where they are checking with the designers for similar decisions. There are good documentaries/movies that show this dramatized in examples like the shuttle Challenger.
- tsunamifury 2y agoYea and with challenger only one engineer raised the alarm while a large group of well meaning engineers overrode him. This is reality. Decisions aren’t kill/not kill.
- bumby 2y agoYeah we both agree that the decision isn’t “kill/not kill”. It’s much more ambiguous and murky, especially when dealing with low probability events. That’s why it takes expertise, but it doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be accountability for those “expert” decisions. Other engineering domains already have this, there isnt anything that makes these decision inherently different.
- phone8675309 2y agoNo they are not! You are responsible for what you sign off on/seal. If you don't want that responsibility then join another profession.
- bumby 2y agoImportantly here, Boeing doesn’t require licensed engineers because they operate under an industrial exemption.
- phone8675309 2y agoSounds like it's time for that to go away
- bumby 2y agoThey aren’t in these industries. Relatively low-level engineers have the capability (some would say duty) to stop work. Typically, they have a different chain of command for that very reason.