4 ms·

Totally insane. Repeating the same errors as in the past and hoping for a better outcome... Only corruption can explain that...

bob001 3mo ago
Let's see if the EU shows some backbone or not.
- shevy-java 3mo ago
  The EU is like a tiger - without teeth, fur or claws. I think the only thing that works here is total boycott of airplanes that constantly unalive people through mass crashes. (Wikipedia really gathers useful data here in a simple-to-read manner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_Boeing_737 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incident...)
  - freeone3000 3mo ago
    You can and should say the word “kill”.
    - inigyou 3mo ago
      Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Exterminate. Exterminate. Humans must die. Humans must die. Exterminate. Exterminate. Exterminate. Exterminate. Am I doing it right?
    - burnt-resistor 3mo ago
      It's a self-censorship habit of people who frequent TikTok, Youtube, and other platforms that shadowban or outright ban particular keywords. I think it's excessively obtuse euphemisms for pseudo-civility that George Carlin would've ripped to shreds.
  - worik 3mo ago
    Interesting analogy, maybe a house cat? I think a better analogy is "The EU is like a lumbering elephant. You can steer it, but only if you know how. Otherwise it just keeps on lumbering" Airbus was a bureaucrats wet dream, and by modern Biz Bro standards should never have got off the ground. Now it rules the skies. Boeing, having drunk the financial Kool Aid is wilting Tortoise and the hare?
    - moomin 3mo ago
      It turns out that sometimes you really do want health and safety obsessed bureaucrats.
  - cindyllm 3mo ago
    [dead]
  - Octoth0rpe 3mo ago
    > The EU is like a tiger - without teeth, fur or claws. EU regs forced apple to move to type-c. They appear to be moving towards either requiring replaceable batteries, or requiring a higher quality batter (larger % of original charge after 1000 cycles). Those both seem valuable to consumers, and coming from a position of regulatory strength.
    - 15155 3mo ago
      > coming from a position of regulatory strength Power is defined by the ability to force people to do things they don't want to do - not things that they might have done anyway eventually or that they can feasibly see might benefit them. In this specific case, the EU gave Apple a golden bridge to retreat over by deprecating the 30-pin cable. If Apple did it themselves, people would have been pissed that they had to buy yet another charger. "Europe is the bad guy, not Apple."
bobthebob 3mo ago
Can you explain exactly why this is bad?
- estearum 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - rcxdude 3mo ago
    I would assume the poster is asking for a more detailed explanation of the implied connection between this and the plane crashes.
    - estearum 3mo ago
      Well that is profoundly lazy. Here, put it into your favorite LLM: "Is there a suspected or established relationship between Boeing's self-certification and the 737 MAX crashes?" That will almost certainly link to the thousands of pages of Congressional, OIG, FAA testimony, investigation, and reporting. Does GP think Boeing's self-certification authority was revoked after the accidents just for funsies? By random chance?
      - deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
      - akerl_ 3mo ago
        As has been noted in several of the comments, the crashes were a result of a faulty design, not aircraft failing to meet the design. The self-certification here wasn’t part of the chain of events that led to the crashes; it appears to have been related to other issues the FAA uncovered as a side effect of their investigation.
        estearum 3mo ago
        As has been noted in the actual reports, the crashes (as is true of all crashes) were the result of a specific chain of failures across several functions and organizations. One component of that chain of failures is the self-certification process. If the FAA had the resource and mandate to actually understand each aircraft design change, then it's very likely (not guaranteed, but very likely) that the MCAS design having a single point of failure on the AoA sensor would have been flagged as problematic by FAA.
kube-system 3mo ago
I have read that self-issuance of airworthiness certificates has been normal since the 1950s. Given that, I don't think the issue is due to regulatory corruption but an issue at Boeing which has (hopefully) been resolved.
- estearum 3mo ago
  "The issue" at Boeing is obscene levels of financialization which, of course, has not been "solved."
  - appreciatorBus 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - estearum 3mo ago
      No it's actually bad when financialization reaches such a degree that planes fall out of the sky. You as an oncologist: "cells have been dividing for thousands of years and are better off for it. the word is meaningless. I would hate to be a single-celled organism." lmao Great insight! Therefore there's no such thing as pathological cell division or pathological financialization. Or maybe it's just if someone is super super super smart, they get so smart they somehow lose the ability to distinguish between productive and pathological financialization, and then they get to make asinine comments on HN.
      - appreciatorBus 3mo ago
        Cancer is a disease that attacks living organisms, similar to how collectivism attacks living societies. "Financialization" is a 7 syllable word with no definition. There is nothing about how Boeing builds & sells planes today that is qualitatively different than how they did it 50 years ago. Yes I am familiar with the concern that engineers hold less sway than previously and I agree this is a concern. I would not be shocked to discover that it's true. But this is not a new thing. People who sell a thing, be they multinational airline manufactures, or a kid selling lemonade, have been able to profit by lying or skimping on quality since the dawn of time. If your concern is that Boeing will skimp on quality & safety, then say that, instead of a buzz word like "financialization" I have no idea where you came across the word, but when I see it used, there's generally a lot of handwaving and some vague implication that it's some new concept/activity that started in the 1970's. The only consistencies I've observed in attempts to define it is that money = financialization or "number go up" = financialization, and the speaker is generally uncomfortable with money as one of the tools we use to organize society.

bob001 3mo ago

Let's see if the EU shows some backbone or not.

shevy-java 3mo ago
The EU is like a tiger - without teeth, fur or claws. I think the only thing that works here is total boycott of airplanes that constantly unalive people through mass crashes. (Wikipedia really gathers useful data here in a simple-to-read manner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_Boeing_737 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incident...)
- freeone3000 3mo ago
  You can and should say the word “kill”.
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Exterminate. Exterminate. Humans must die. Humans must die. Exterminate. Exterminate. Exterminate. Exterminate. Am I doing it right?
  - burnt-resistor 3mo ago
    It's a self-censorship habit of people who frequent TikTok, Youtube, and other platforms that shadowban or outright ban particular keywords. I think it's excessively obtuse euphemisms for pseudo-civility that George Carlin would've ripped to shreds.
- worik 3mo ago
  Interesting analogy, maybe a house cat? I think a better analogy is "The EU is like a lumbering elephant. You can steer it, but only if you know how. Otherwise it just keeps on lumbering" Airbus was a bureaucrats wet dream, and by modern Biz Bro standards should never have got off the ground. Now it rules the skies. Boeing, having drunk the financial Kool Aid is wilting Tortoise and the hare?
  - moomin 3mo ago
    It turns out that sometimes you really do want health and safety obsessed bureaucrats.
- cindyllm 3mo ago
  [dead]
- Octoth0rpe 3mo ago
  > The EU is like a tiger - without teeth, fur or claws. EU regs forced apple to move to type-c. They appear to be moving towards either requiring replaceable batteries, or requiring a higher quality batter (larger % of original charge after 1000 cycles). Those both seem valuable to consumers, and coming from a position of regulatory strength.
  - 15155 3mo ago
    > coming from a position of regulatory strength Power is defined by the ability to force people to do things they don't want to do - not things that they might have done anyway eventually or that they can feasibly see might benefit them. In this specific case, the EU gave Apple a golden bridge to retreat over by deprecating the 30-pin cable. If Apple did it themselves, people would have been pissed that they had to buy yet another charger. "Europe is the bad guy, not Apple."

bobthebob 3mo ago

Can you explain exactly why this is bad?

estearum 3mo ago
[flagged]
- rcxdude 3mo ago
  I would assume the poster is asking for a more detailed explanation of the implied connection between this and the plane crashes.
  - estearum 3mo ago
    Well that is profoundly lazy. Here, put it into your favorite LLM: "Is there a suspected or established relationship between Boeing's self-certification and the 737 MAX crashes?" That will almost certainly link to the thousands of pages of Congressional, OIG, FAA testimony, investigation, and reporting. Does GP think Boeing's self-certification authority was revoked after the accidents just for funsies? By random chance?
    - deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
    - akerl_ 3mo ago
      As has been noted in several of the comments, the crashes were a result of a faulty design, not aircraft failing to meet the design. The self-certification here wasn’t part of the chain of events that led to the crashes; it appears to have been related to other issues the FAA uncovered as a side effect of their investigation.
      - estearum 3mo ago
        As has been noted in the actual reports, the crashes (as is true of all crashes) were the result of a specific chain of failures across several functions and organizations. One component of that chain of failures is the self-certification process. If the FAA had the resource and mandate to actually understand each aircraft design change, then it's very likely (not guaranteed, but very likely) that the MCAS design having a single point of failure on the AoA sensor would have been flagged as problematic by FAA.

kube-system 3mo ago

I have read that self-issuance of airworthiness certificates has been normal since the 1950s. Given that, I don't think the issue is due to regulatory corruption but an issue at Boeing which has (hopefully) been resolved.

estearum 3mo ago
"The issue" at Boeing is obscene levels of financialization which, of course, has not been "solved."
- appreciatorBus 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - estearum 3mo ago
    No it's actually bad when financialization reaches such a degree that planes fall out of the sky. You as an oncologist: "cells have been dividing for thousands of years and are better off for it. the word is meaningless. I would hate to be a single-celled organism." lmao Great insight! Therefore there's no such thing as pathological cell division or pathological financialization. Or maybe it's just if someone is super super super smart, they get so smart they somehow lose the ability to distinguish between productive and pathological financialization, and then they get to make asinine comments on HN.
    - appreciatorBus 3mo ago
      Cancer is a disease that attacks living organisms, similar to how collectivism attacks living societies. "Financialization" is a 7 syllable word with no definition. There is nothing about how Boeing builds & sells planes today that is qualitatively different than how they did it 50 years ago. Yes I am familiar with the concern that engineers hold less sway than previously and I agree this is a concern. I would not be shocked to discover that it's true. But this is not a new thing. People who sell a thing, be they multinational airline manufactures, or a kid selling lemonade, have been able to profit by lying or skimping on quality since the dawn of time. If your concern is that Boeing will skimp on quality & safety, then say that, instead of a buzz word like "financialization" I have no idea where you came across the word, but when I see it used, there's generally a lot of handwaving and some vague implication that it's some new concept/activity that started in the 1970's. The only consistencies I've observed in attempts to define it is that money = financialization or "number go up" = financialization, and the speaker is generally uncomfortable with money as one of the tools we use to organize society.