5 ms·

It's strange how much some people are assuming this is as a result of a mistake or incompetence instead of simple corruption. "Whoops I made $600 from somethin

by pydry 2y ago

It's strange how much some people are assuming this is as a result of a mistake or incompetence instead of simple corruption. "Whoops I made $600 from something that cost me $10"

oivey 2y ago
True. That’s really a bridge too far for people who believe a Boeing executive who says tactical soap dispensers really do cost $700.
- SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
  The international man of mystery would like a word. Those tactical soap dispensers can be a great defense against tactical shoes. Can’t put a price on that.
- hulitu 2y ago
  In the same country where Pentagon paid 10$ for a paperclip. (cannot find a source right now, ddg and startpage are both braindead when it comes to searching)
  - pydry 2y ago
    https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-30-vw-18804-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-30-vw-18804-... It was screws, maybe? According to the U.S. attorney, the company “grossly inflated prices intentionally”, although according to mschuster91 people just don't understand the level of paperwork needed to create these $37 screws and $600 toilet seats.
mschuster91 2y ago
> "Whoops I made $600 from something that cost me $10" I've written about this here some time ago - you don't pay for the soap dispenser or trash bin itself, you pay for the paperwork showing that it is safe to install this trash bin, soap dispenser or whatnot into this specific model of aircraft or spacecraft, and you pay for the paperwork that details the entire life of every tiny little piece used to manufacture that component. For flight-critical parts, IIRC that goes as far as to documenting the specific lot of the iron ore that was used to make the metal sheets, so in the event of something cropping up where something got fucked up in the mine or the smelter, you can recall every single part that could be affected. And there's lots of testing (and associated waste) at each part of the step. Anything that goes into an airplane or spacecraft has ridiculous rules attached to it... rules that were literally written in blood. Aerospace is amongst the safest ways of transportation because of decades of crashes and learning from each and every single one. Your average Home Depot soap dispenser has none of that, if it breaks it breaks.
- jon-wood 2y ago
  This is a soap dispenser though. That's not a safety critical component, the soap dispenser breaking isn't going to cause a plane to fall out of the sky, or the weapons system to accidentally go off, it's just a thing for dispensing soap.
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    > That's not a safety critical component, the soap dispenser breaking isn't going to cause a plane to fall out of the sky Depends on the failure mode. Assume the screws with which the soap dispenser is installed are spec'd to wrong torque and the installation causes stress fractures as a result that end up propagating through the aircraft... Yes it sounds far-fetched, but aircrafts have crashed due to microfractures caused by improper torques on other components...
- markdown 2y ago
  Yeah nah, paperwork doesn't cost 8000%. Not to mention Boeing is the one (via massive bribes paid to FAA bosses who are usually "ex"-employees) who gets those regulations written to ensure no other party can bid for $600 soap dispensers.
- do_not_redeem 2y ago
  Shouldn't risk factor into the equation? If your soap dispenser breaks, yeah that sucks and it's maybe a little gross, but you can just replace it with you land. I struggle to imagine what rule about soap dispensers was written in blood. Surely there's a more cost-effective happy medium somewhere between "just buy the Home Depot 2-for-1 special" and "we ran a background check on the guy who mined the metal"
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    > If your soap dispenser breaks, yeah that sucks and it's maybe a little gross, but you can just replace it with you land. I struggle to imagine what rule about soap dispensers was written in blood. The very second you start making an exception because "a soap dispenser is trivial", other stuff will get labeled as exempt (or treated as such), eventually there will be no one knowing what is exempt and what is not, and someone will treat something as exempt that clearly shouldn't have been exempt, causing an incident. In aircraft and spacecraft design and manufacture, the rule is "safety by design". Treating everything as "needs to be certified by default" is fail-safe, it eliminates entire classes of incident causes.

by pydry 2y ago

It's strange how much some people are assuming this is as a result of a mistake or incompetence instead of simple corruption. "Whoops I made $600 from something that cost me $10"

oivey 2y ago

True. That’s really a bridge too far for people who believe a Boeing executive who says tactical soap dispensers really do cost $700.

SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
The international man of mystery would like a word. Those tactical soap dispensers can be a great defense against tactical shoes. Can’t put a price on that.
hulitu 2y ago
In the same country where Pentagon paid 10$ for a paperclip. (cannot find a source right now, ddg and startpage are both braindead when it comes to searching)
- pydry 2y ago
  https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-30-vw-18804-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-30-vw-18804-... It was screws, maybe? According to the U.S. attorney, the company “grossly inflated prices intentionally”, although according to mschuster91 people just don't understand the level of paperwork needed to create these $37 screws and $600 toilet seats.

mschuster91 2y ago

> "Whoops I made $600 from something that cost me $10" I've written about this here some time ago - you don't pay for the soap dispenser or trash bin itself, you pay for the paperwork showing that it is safe to install this trash bin, soap dispenser or whatnot into this specific model of aircraft or spacecraft, and you pay for the paperwork that details the entire life of every tiny little piece used to manufacture that component. For flight-critical parts, IIRC that goes as far as to documenting the specific lot of the iron ore that was used to make the metal sheets, so in the event of something cropping up where something got fucked up in the mine or the smelter, you can recall every single part that could be affected. And there's lots of testing (and associated waste) at each part of the step. Anything that goes into an airplane or spacecraft has ridiculous rules attached to it... rules that were literally written in blood. Aerospace is amongst the safest ways of transportation because of decades of crashes and learning from each and every single one. Your average Home Depot soap dispenser has none of that, if it breaks it breaks.

jon-wood 2y ago
This is a soap dispenser though. That's not a safety critical component, the soap dispenser breaking isn't going to cause a plane to fall out of the sky, or the weapons system to accidentally go off, it's just a thing for dispensing soap.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > That's not a safety critical component, the soap dispenser breaking isn't going to cause a plane to fall out of the sky Depends on the failure mode. Assume the screws with which the soap dispenser is installed are spec'd to wrong torque and the installation causes stress fractures as a result that end up propagating through the aircraft... Yes it sounds far-fetched, but aircrafts have crashed due to microfractures caused by improper torques on other components...
markdown 2y ago
Yeah nah, paperwork doesn't cost 8000%. Not to mention Boeing is the one (via massive bribes paid to FAA bosses who are usually "ex"-employees) who gets those regulations written to ensure no other party can bid for $600 soap dispensers.
do_not_redeem 2y ago
Shouldn't risk factor into the equation? If your soap dispenser breaks, yeah that sucks and it's maybe a little gross, but you can just replace it with you land. I struggle to imagine what rule about soap dispensers was written in blood. Surely there's a more cost-effective happy medium somewhere between "just buy the Home Depot 2-for-1 special" and "we ran a background check on the guy who mined the metal"
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > If your soap dispenser breaks, yeah that sucks and it's maybe a little gross, but you can just replace it with you land. I struggle to imagine what rule about soap dispensers was written in blood. The very second you start making an exception because "a soap dispenser is trivial", other stuff will get labeled as exempt (or treated as such), eventually there will be no one knowing what is exempt and what is not, and someone will treat something as exempt that clearly shouldn't have been exempt, causing an incident. In aircraft and spacecraft design and manufacture, the rule is "safety by design". Treating everything as "needs to be certified by default" is fail-safe, it eliminates entire classes of incident causes.