8 ms·

Well that was wild. An industry wide recruiting blacklist sounds terrible. Key takeaways here are probably "Vinfast doesn't have much in house engineering" and

Well that was wild. An industry wide recruiting blacklist sounds terrible. Key takeaways here are probably "Vinfast doesn't have much in house engineering" and "don't buy one right now".

buckle8017 2y ago
The key takeaway is that Tata Group doesn't care about safety at all.
- lnsru 2y ago
  Who cares actually? Nobody. See initial Tesla problem with wheels falling off: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-agency-opens-probe-into-120000-tesla-model-y-vehicles-2023-03-08/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-age... Launch fast, ignore obvious things. I see it daily: „just ship products, we finish them when they come for repairs“. Scary new world, nobody is really responsible for this. The workers do not stay long. As well as managers.
  - dontlaugh 2y ago
    Tesla and Tata are both famously worse than the rest of the industry, though.
  - egeozcan 2y ago
    I recall a discussion here about the decline in software quality, from many years ago. Someone argued that if we designed hardware the way we design software, we'd be too afraid to go outside. At the time, I thought it was just hyperbole... It's still clearly an exaggeration, but one could argue that reality is gradually moving in that direction.
    - stonemetal12 2y ago
      >gradually moving in that direction Lead paint on children's toys and asbestos in the walls suggest there has never been a culture of making sure it is safe before putting it in production even in the physical world.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        Lead pipes, yes. But asbestos in the walls is great for the safety of those living there — the place doesn't burn down so easily. It's the safety of anyone who inhales the dust when the place gets broken down that's endangered by asbestos.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - lnsru 2y ago
      My director pushes production guys really hard. They sometimes close an eye and ship a bit faulty product. No screws on heatspreader or wrong thermal pad. And here you go, these things do not last long. But in the books revenue was made in that year. Repairs will come later as separate expense.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      > I recall a discussion here about the decline in software quality, from many years ago. Someone argued that if we designed hardware the way we design software, we'd be too afraid to go outside. At the time, I thought it was just hyperbole... That meme goes back at least to the 90s: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/car-balk/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/car-balk/
    - EasyMark 2y ago
      My take on this that's more to do with increase in software complexity and "quarterly thinking" than "people just don't care." As an embedded engineer I don't get much to say except maybe sprint to sprint unless I start my own company.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
        "Quarterly thinking" is an implementation detail of "people just don't care".
  - smitelli 2y ago
    > Who cares actually? Nobody. I do. Speaking only for myself, but Tesla has a long long way to go to repair its manufacturing reputation in my eyes.
  - sorenjan 2y ago
    Volvo has their own safety center. https://youtube.com/watch?v=wOJrhNCsPL4 https://youtube.com/watch?v=wOJrhNCsPL4
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      Do you think any medium sized car company doesn't have that?
  - borski 2y ago
    Tesla is, by far, the most egregious representative of this. Tata is second. Plenty of companies do care. These two don’t.
- xbar 2y ago
  True. Nor does any other manufacturer of cars nor toys nor paint nor cosmetics nor AI software nor canned foods.... Consumers and victims care about safety. Regulation is the only reason safety exists.
  - borski 2y ago
    Lucid and Volvo both care very much about safety. Safety is core to both their brands, and part of what they’ve built them on.
    - zie 2y ago
      Volvo in the past absolutely cared, future Volvo it's still unknown(they have a new owner and their position is unknown last I checked).
      - InsideOutSanta 2y ago
        Volvo is majority-owned by Geely, a car brand that is definitely not known for safety.
        zie 2y ago
        I meant Volvo’s position under the new ownership. It’s possible Geely enforces Volvo to care as much as they care. It’s also possible they let Volvo be Volvo around safety and have some other way to juice the returns and make them a bunch of money from the purchase. Time will tell.
    - InsideOutSanta 2y ago
      I think Volvo is a good example for why most companies don't care about safety any more than the law and basic PR requires: the market does not reward companies that try to use safety as a selling point. Volvo is the only major car company that consistently manufactures cars that widely exceed legal safety requirements, but have a global market share of less than half a percent. That's probably about the number of people who take safety into consideration as a major factor when making purchasing decisions.
- ipython 2y ago
  It’s all about economics. Just apply the formula: https://youtu.be/SiB8GVMNJkE https://youtu.be/SiB8GVMNJkE (May not be SFW depending on where you work)
Mashimo 2y ago
Or at least blacklisted from that platform they use for recruitment? https://magnitglobal.com/us/en/workforce-management-platform/integrated-platform.html https://magnitglobal.com/us/en/workforce-management-platform... > AI-powered Talent Matching: Leverage AI to identify and match top talent across blue collar and white collar roles from a broad range of sources including contingent workers, freelancers, and project-based workers.
asplake 2y ago
Is that even legal in the UK?
pjc50 2y ago
I wonder how an industry wide blacklist complies with GDPR right to be forgotten. Oh wait, it doesn't, but because it's not a tech company it gets a free pass.
- GJim 2y ago
  You are being downvoted because you fail to understand the basic tenants of the GDPR. Choosing to remain ignorant of such important legislation is ridiculous.
  - sib 2y ago
    >> because you fail to understand the basic tenants of the GDPR Hi! In the spirit of improving communication and assuming that you'd like to know: A tenant is someone who rents a property A tenet is a principle or belief that is generally considered to be true
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Disagree, I think it's more about the snark. GDPR may have technically replaced the right to be forgotten with a more limited right of erasure, but unless you care about legal phrasing it's an easy thing to mix up. Also, it does look like a GDPR issue to me — not that I'm a lawyer, so usual caveat applies, all I can do is look at the plain language of GDPR on the Commission website. GDPR regulates "personal data" (information that relates to an identified or identifiable individual), and looking at the "lawful purposes" list in Article 6, people running such a thing would seem to me to need to make some kind of argument about "legitimate interests" or "performance of a contract". It may be that a plain reading of this isn't giving me the correct answer, but I don't see how placing specifically whistleblowers (rather than, say, known embezzlers) on a blacklist would meet the standards: https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/grounds-processing/what-does-grounds-legitimate-interest-mean_en https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/r...

Well that was wild. An industry wide recruiting blacklist sounds terrible. Key takeaways here are probably "Vinfast doesn't have much in house engineering" and "don't buy one right now".

buckle8017 2y ago

The key takeaway is that Tata Group doesn't care about safety at all.

lnsru 2y ago
Who cares actually? Nobody. See initial Tesla problem with wheels falling off: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-agency-opens-probe-into-120000-tesla-model-y-vehicles-2023-03-08/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-age... Launch fast, ignore obvious things. I see it daily: „just ship products, we finish them when they come for repairs“. Scary new world, nobody is really responsible for this. The workers do not stay long. As well as managers.
- dontlaugh 2y ago
  Tesla and Tata are both famously worse than the rest of the industry, though.
- egeozcan 2y ago
  I recall a discussion here about the decline in software quality, from many years ago. Someone argued that if we designed hardware the way we design software, we'd be too afraid to go outside. At the time, I thought it was just hyperbole... It's still clearly an exaggeration, but one could argue that reality is gradually moving in that direction.
  - stonemetal12 2y ago
    >gradually moving in that direction Lead paint on children's toys and asbestos in the walls suggest there has never been a culture of making sure it is safe before putting it in production even in the physical world.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      Lead pipes, yes. But asbestos in the walls is great for the safety of those living there — the place doesn't burn down so easily. It's the safety of anyone who inhales the dust when the place gets broken down that's endangered by asbestos.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - lnsru 2y ago
    My director pushes production guys really hard. They sometimes close an eye and ship a bit faulty product. No screws on heatspreader or wrong thermal pad. And here you go, these things do not last long. But in the books revenue was made in that year. Repairs will come later as separate expense.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    > I recall a discussion here about the decline in software quality, from many years ago. Someone argued that if we designed hardware the way we design software, we'd be too afraid to go outside. At the time, I thought it was just hyperbole... That meme goes back at least to the 90s: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/car-balk/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/car-balk/
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    My take on this that's more to do with increase in software complexity and "quarterly thinking" than "people just don't care." As an embedded engineer I don't get much to say except maybe sprint to sprint unless I start my own company.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
      "Quarterly thinking" is an implementation detail of "people just don't care".
- smitelli 2y ago
  > Who cares actually? Nobody. I do. Speaking only for myself, but Tesla has a long long way to go to repair its manufacturing reputation in my eyes.
- sorenjan 2y ago
  Volvo has their own safety center. https://youtube.com/watch?v=wOJrhNCsPL4 https://youtube.com/watch?v=wOJrhNCsPL4
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    Do you think any medium sized car company doesn't have that?
- borski 2y ago
  Tesla is, by far, the most egregious representative of this. Tata is second. Plenty of companies do care. These two don’t.
xbar 2y ago
True. Nor does any other manufacturer of cars nor toys nor paint nor cosmetics nor AI software nor canned foods.... Consumers and victims care about safety. Regulation is the only reason safety exists.
- borski 2y ago
  Lucid and Volvo both care very much about safety. Safety is core to both their brands, and part of what they’ve built them on.
  - zie 2y ago
    Volvo in the past absolutely cared, future Volvo it's still unknown(they have a new owner and their position is unknown last I checked).
    - InsideOutSanta 2y ago
      Volvo is majority-owned by Geely, a car brand that is definitely not known for safety.
      - zie 2y ago
        I meant Volvo’s position under the new ownership. It’s possible Geely enforces Volvo to care as much as they care. It’s also possible they let Volvo be Volvo around safety and have some other way to juice the returns and make them a bunch of money from the purchase. Time will tell.
  - InsideOutSanta 2y ago
    I think Volvo is a good example for why most companies don't care about safety any more than the law and basic PR requires: the market does not reward companies that try to use safety as a selling point. Volvo is the only major car company that consistently manufactures cars that widely exceed legal safety requirements, but have a global market share of less than half a percent. That's probably about the number of people who take safety into consideration as a major factor when making purchasing decisions.
ipython 2y ago
It’s all about economics. Just apply the formula: https://youtu.be/SiB8GVMNJkE https://youtu.be/SiB8GVMNJkE (May not be SFW depending on where you work)

Mashimo 2y ago

Or at least blacklisted from that platform they use for recruitment? https://magnitglobal.com/us/en/workforce-management-platform/integrated-platform.html https://magnitglobal.com/us/en/workforce-management-platform... > AI-powered Talent Matching: Leverage AI to identify and match top talent across blue collar and white collar roles from a broad range of sources including contingent workers, freelancers, and project-based workers.

asplake 2y ago

Is that even legal in the UK?

pjc50 2y ago

I wonder how an industry wide blacklist complies with GDPR right to be forgotten. Oh wait, it doesn't, but because it's not a tech company it gets a free pass.

GJim 2y ago
You are being downvoted because you fail to understand the basic tenants of the GDPR. Choosing to remain ignorant of such important legislation is ridiculous.
- sib 2y ago
  >> because you fail to understand the basic tenants of the GDPR Hi! In the spirit of improving communication and assuming that you'd like to know: A tenant is someone who rents a property A tenet is a principle or belief that is generally considered to be true
- ben_w 2y ago
  Disagree, I think it's more about the snark. GDPR may have technically replaced the right to be forgotten with a more limited right of erasure, but unless you care about legal phrasing it's an easy thing to mix up. Also, it does look like a GDPR issue to me — not that I'm a lawyer, so usual caveat applies, all I can do is look at the plain language of GDPR on the Commission website. GDPR regulates "personal data" (information that relates to an identified or identifiable individual), and looking at the "lawful purposes" list in Article 6, people running such a thing would seem to me to need to make some kind of argument about "legitimate interests" or "performance of a contract". It may be that a plain reading of this isn't giving me the correct answer, but I don't see how placing specifically whistleblowers (rather than, say, known embezzlers) on a blacklist would meet the standards: https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/grounds-processing/what-does-grounds-legitimate-interest-mean_en https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/r...