Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Duty of care

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 55 posts

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#11

Post by defrost »

SentinelLdnma wrote: post #7
remarkEon wrote: post #4

But why did they want to remove The Big Red Button? Sorry if that’s a dumb question.

Not at all a dumb question. But the answer will be. The Big Boss Man hated the way it looked. He once spent 30 minutes telling a graphics designer what a worthless piece of sh* he was where everyone on the floor could hear. Corporate equivalent of a terrorist.

> There was a Big Red Button acting as a physical power cut-out.

> Request was to remove the physical button and rely only on a software (touch screen). Death was a remote harm, but moderate injury / user stuck in device / panic attack was plausible.

Good on you for not removing it.

I work sometimes in mineral processing (above ground | below ground) with conveyor belts, crushers, etc.

Big easy physical power cutouts are everywhere:

Conveyors have "rip cords" running alongside, pull them and you can stop a 30 tonne/hour conveyor maybe before someone drawn into the rollers is crushed to death or maimed.

Crushers | screens | most big equipment has single OFF knife switch with "gang plates" that take multiple padlocks - if you and two others work inside a crusher you each put a lock (three in total) through the gang plates and nobody gets to restart the machin until everybody is out and has removed their padlock.

Big physical switches save lives.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#12

Post by Ptchd »

SentinelLdnma wrote: post #7
remarkEon wrote: post #4

But why did they want to remove The Big Red Button? Sorry if that’s a dumb question.

Not at all a dumb question. But the answer will be. The Big Boss Man hated the way it looked. He once spent 30 minutes telling a graphics designer what a worthless piece of sh* he was where everyone on the floor could hear. Corporate equivalent of a terrorist.

No post body was provided.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#13

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

I think the fact that software "engineering" (and, yes, those are meant to be scare quotes) doesn't have the same level of rigor of other engineering disciplines is what is truly at fault here.

Most other professional engineering disciplines have clear, codified rules of ethics. If the Chairman of a public company told a building engineer "Can you get rid of a few of these bolts on this beam here? I don't like the way they look." he would rightfully be told to get bent by literally nearly any structural engineer. And it's not because structural engineers have vastly greater morals or thicker backbones. It's because they know they could, and should, lose their engineering license (not to mention be personally liable) if something were to go awry due to a clear violation of engineering standards.

Kudos to you for sticking up for what was right, but it's still an overall process failure that this situation required you to have this backbone instead of being able to fall back on "What you're asking me to do is a clear violation of professional standards that could cause me to lose my license."

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#15

Post by klyrs »

Damn. And I thought I was tough for holding the line against spam and popup ads at a 1-developer shop from 2001-2004. Thank you for your service.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#16

Post by SentinelLdnma »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I think the fact that software "engineering" (and, yes, those are meant to be scare quotes) doesn't have the same level of rigor of other engineering disciplines is what is truly at fault here. Most other professional engineering disciplines have clear, codified rules of ethics. If the Chairman of a public company told a building engineer "Can you get rid of a few of these bolts on this beam here? I don't like the wa…

I took an Ethics for Engineers course as an elective in college (sometime during the stone age). Wrote a paper on Therac-25. Had I not, I may not even been cognizant of the risk involved.

A single week lecture on this topic could move the needle.

Or regulators like FDA could demand to see corporate training materials given to software "engineers" (I concur on the quotes) on how to promote product safety.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#18

Post by clnq »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I think the fact that software "engineering" (and, yes, those are meant to be scare quotes) doesn't have the same level of rigor of other engineering disciplines is what is truly at fault here. Most other professional engineering disciplines have clear, codified rules of ethics. If the Chairman of a public company told a building engineer "Can you get rid of a few of these bolts on this beam here? I don't like the wa…

The labor pool of software engineers is very diverse in terms of backbones, ethics and morals. It puts replaceable engineers in an awkward spot to object to unprofessional requests.

For an anecdotal example, I have been told that standing up for ethics in software engineering would have negative consequences on my performance (implied: bonus, promotions, career). I have left that company, and they probably found someone more agreeable to replace me.

I don't know how we can force ethics onto companies, especially large corporations who receive thousands of applicants into engineering roles each week. There do not seem to be good incentives for engineers to be overly concerned with the overall ethical impact of their work. And so there are many engineers who won't ready to replace those who would.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#19

Post by lolinder »

SentinelLdnma wrote: post #16
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I think the fact that software "engineering" (and, yes, those are meant to be scare quotes) doesn't have the same level of rigor of other engineering disciplines is what is truly at fault here. Most other professional engineering disciplines have clear, codified rules of ethics. If the Chairman of a public company told a building engineer "Can you get rid of a few of these bolts on this beam here? I don't like the wa…

I took an Ethics for Engineers course as an elective in college (sometime during the stone age). Wrote a paper on Therac-25. Had I not, I may not even been cognizant of the risk involved. A single week lecture on this topic could move the needle. Or regulators like FDA could demand to see corporate training materials given to software "engineers" (I concur on the quotes) on how to promote product safety.

My school required a software-focused ethics course in order to graduate with a CS degree. It was great—one of the few courses that I lean on on a regular basis in my work.

Good on you for taking it as an elective, but it's weird to me that any degree in any topic can be accredited without having a mandatory ethics course, let alone a degree in a science/engineering field.

Re: Tell HN: Duty of care

#20

Post by trinovantes »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I think the fact that software "engineering" (and, yes, those are meant to be scare quotes) doesn't have the same level of rigor of other engineering disciplines is what is truly at fault here. Most other professional engineering disciplines have clear, codified rules of ethics. If the Chairman of a public company told a building engineer "Can you get rid of a few of these bolts on this beam here? I don't like the wa…

In some jurisdictions, software engineer is a protected job title that requires professional licensing (ever wonder why Google only hires "developer" in their Waterloo office but "engineer" elsewhere?). IIRC the engineer that wrote the code for the Volkswagen scandal was jailed for failing his professional obligations.

For OP's case case, I'd assume/hope a professional engineer would need to sign off on this change or be able to tell the VP to f off.

Post reply on HN