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

DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 130 posts

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#121

Post by opwieurposiu »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #118
saiya-jin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name one CEO of massive company with good relationship with US government that ever went to jail for things like 2008 financial crisis, or similar moral failures and criminal acts. As much as those names you named are important, they are peasants compared to power wielded by the big guys.

Bernie Madoff was no peasant. He started the NASDAQ, and apart from not meeting your requirement of being a massive company CEO, ticked off all the boxes. He got 150 years in prison.

Bernie's mistake was stealing from other rich people. Much safer to steal from the taxpayer.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#122

Post by csours »

redis_mlc wrote: post #94
csours wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who do you think should? An engineer who worked on the system? A manager? What law was broken? If you were in their position, how would you know you were breaking the law? Diffuse responsibility is a real problem. 'Teaching to the test' is a real problem. Normalizing risk is a real problem. Blaming individuals is very satisfying, and it's very easy to do with hindsight, but if you want large complex systems to work b…

> What law was broken? The above comment is very, very uninformed. Aviation is a heavily regulated industry, totally unlike IT. There's several legal avenues for individual prosecution: 1) False certification documents about MCAS performance were submitted to the FAA, so it would be very easy to find out who those people were, and who their managers were. The US government has no problem prosecuting people for fraud…

To quote myself:

> I'm not saying it's easy, and I'm not saying that we should stop looking for law-breakers, but I am saying that punishment will not lead to better outcomes in the absence of other positive actions.

If laws were broken, by all means, use the justice system to pursue those lawbreaker; but do not expect that to solve everything.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#123

Post by mayneack »

BurningFrog wrote: post #49
mayneack wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ certainly seems to think a law was broken. As I see it you charge the most obvious person and let them try to blame someone else. Eventually you either find people you can blame and if you can't go up a level until you reach the CEO. If the CEO goes to prison, other CEOs will care more than this one, if some compliance officer does, the next one won't be as willing to bend to implied pressure from leadership.

> The DOJ certainly seems to think a law was broken. That fortunately doesn't matter. To send someone to jail, you need to convince a jury they committed a serious crime.

I don't understand this comment. The DOJ bringing charges has to be step one towards that end. The same exact thing is happening with Boeing, we just didn't hear about it until after they negotiated a settlement. This happens all the time with plea deals. If they can't agree it goes to trial.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#124

Post by BurningFrog »

mayneack wrote: post #123
BurningFrog wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The DOJ certainly seems to think a law was broken. That fortunately doesn't matter. To send someone to jail, you need to convince a jury they committed a serious crime.

I don't understand this comment. The DOJ bringing charges has to be step one towards that end. The same exact thing is happening with Boeing, we just didn't hear about it until after they negotiated a settlement. This happens all the time with plea deals. If they can't agree it goes to trial.

> The DOJ bringing charges has to be step one towards that end.

Sure. My point is that it's quite different from a conviction.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#125

Post by pdonis »

haltingproblem wrote: post #75
pdonis wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the theory of causation, we distinguish between proximate vs. ultimate causality. Yes, and you have them backwards. "The engineers failed to raise the issue" is a proximate cause, not an ultimate cause. If engineers in your company are failing to raise obvious technical issues, then either you're hiring incompetent engineers, or your corporate culture discourages engineers from speaking up and punishes those who…

How do I have them backwards? The theory attributes ultimate cause to something that is way way in the past. The event is chosen to maximize narrative plausibility. There is no way to verify the narrative or better falsify it. The theory conveniently exonerates Boeing engineers without any supporting evidence, forget falsification.

> The theory attributes ultimate cause to something that is way way in the past.

Yes, that's what "ultimate" cause means. Not necessarily way back in the past, but way back in the causal chain. Basically, you keep on asking "what caused that?" until you get to an answer that looks like a reasonable stopping point. Saying "the engineers failed" isn't a reasonable stopping point because the engineers weren't acting in isolation or on their own; they were acting as part of a larger organization that was not just an organization of engineers. So if they failed, it means the larger organization failed, and you have to look at why that happened to find the ultimate cause.

> The theory conveniently exonerates Boeing engineers

It does no such thing. It is perfectly possible for the engineers to be at fault and for the larger organization of the Boeing corporation to also be at fault. The reason for looking beyond the engineers is not to "exonerate" the engineers, but to make sure that "blame the engineers" does not get used as an excuse to exonerate others who also contributed to the failure and who should be held accountable.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#126

Post by pdonis »

haltingproblem wrote: post #73
pdonis wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not a single engineer raised issues with the engineering of the aircraft. Not a single engineer wrote a blistering memo calling out its failing or quit in protest. I don't think this is true. There was an HN thread some time ago on an article describing how one senior production manager, who was an engineer by background and had previously worked at Boeing as an engineer, looked at the design specs, talked to peopl…

I would appreciate the citation, not doubting but would love to read it since I have not seen anything like it in the public domain.

> I would appreciate the citation

Unfortunately I haven't been able to find it. If I do I'll post a link here.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#127

Post by redis_mlc »

csours wrote: post #122
redis_mlc wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What law was broken? The above comment is very, very uninformed. Aviation is a heavily regulated industry, totally unlike IT. There's several legal avenues for individual prosecution: 1) False certification documents about MCAS performance were submitted to the FAA, so it would be very easy to find out who those people were, and who their managers were. The US government has no problem prosecuting people for fraud…

To quote myself: > I'm not saying it's easy, and I'm not saying that we should stop looking for law-breakers, but I am saying that punishment will not lead to better outcomes in the absence of other positive actions. If laws were broken, by all means, use the justice system to pursue those lawbreaker; but do not expect that to solve everything.

Aviation is a regulated industry. Enforcement works.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#128

Post by Beldin »

seibelj wrote: post #72
snovv_crash wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this why we pay the executive team the big bucks?

It’s one thing to fire the exec team. It’s another to charge them with criminal responsibility, especially when the shareholders will ultimately fund their defense one way or another. I don’t think it would be proven. My comment was a broader point about why corporations never seem to have employees get charged. It’s because they usually aren’t liable and won’t get convicted by a jury, and the government subpoenas al…

> It’s one thing to fire the exec team. It’s another to charge them with criminal responsibility

What is their role, their contribution to the company, if not "taking responsibility"?

And if that is not part of their task, how much cheaper can this role be fulfilled with sufficient impact by someone else?

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#129

Post by snovv_crash »

seibelj wrote: post #72
snovv_crash wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this why we pay the executive team the big bucks?

It’s one thing to fire the exec team. It’s another to charge them with criminal responsibility, especially when the shareholders will ultimately fund their defense one way or another. I don’t think it would be proven. My comment was a broader point about why corporations never seem to have employees get charged. It’s because they usually aren’t liable and won’t get convicted by a jury, and the government subpoenas al…

Professional engineers can be held criminally responsible if a building they sign off on fails. Chartered accountants can be held criminally liable if they sign off on fudged books. I don't see why an executive can't be held responsible for creating a culture under which illegal activity is the only viable option for their employees.

Re: DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy

#130

Post by KorematsuFred »

ineedasername wrote: post #31
KorematsuFred wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constant news around this bothered me deeply. Someone admits they committed fraud and 346 people died but pays a small sum to get out of the mess without jail time for anyone ? A lot of people say this is bad and these corporations are too powerful and we need someone like Bernie sanders to teach them a lesson. A closer scrutiny reveals exactly the opposite. It is the government that is too powerful, government tries…

You're basically saying the fact that the government can investigate a thing is proof that the government is too powerful. I'm not sure where you get the idea that an investigation was opened with the specific purpose of jailing an executive: I don't see any indication that was the case, and just about anyone in or outside of government could have predicted before the investigation that no executive would go to jail…

> You're basically saying the fact that the government can investigate a thing is proof that the government is too powerful.

Not at all. If government could actually investigate and prove charges and jail Boeing CEO would be the sign of an effective government.

The fact that it simple files charges, does a phony investigation and settles for a very low bribe for the deaths of my loved ones is the proof that we are dealing with a mafia and not a government of people.

Post reply on HN