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

US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

on.ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 367 posts

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#281

Post by int_19h »

akira2501 wrote: post #154
tw04 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And government should only have as much power as you think the worst possible people in charge should have. This immediately falls apart, by that logic we should literally have no government or society to speak of. "Only as much power as you think the worst possible person should have" would mean literally no power - there isn't a single decision in my life I would pass off to the worst person I could think of. Wha…

> we should literally have no government or society to speak of I don't think society is dependent on government. > would mean literally no power Literally no power ensconced in the hands of a _single individual_, I think was the point.

There are no historical or current examples of societies larger than a tribe that are lacking any form of government.

The thing that is not mandatory, however, is the state, which is not a synonym. State-based government is centralized government, but government does not necessarily need to be centralized to the point where the result is a state.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#282

Post by int_19h »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #273
notJim wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances I don't think this viewpoint can be supported empirically. The US government has much stronger checks and balances than most parliamentary systems where the prime minister is elected by the parliament. This means that there's no split possible between the executive and legislative branch. I think the result of this in the US is that…

> in the US is that the government tends to deadlock This is a feature. In a unitary state, it would be suicide. But in a federation, national disagreement prompts gridlock which automatically devolves the question.

It doesn't, though. It just means that whatever current arrangement exists on federal level (which is not necessarily devolution!) remains in force.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#283

Post by stevehawk »

xenadu02 wrote: post #112
cromka wrote: post #105

Can someone explain why the focus is on FAA, while there's also EASA and others? Do they also allow Boeing to self-inspect and self-evaluate themselves like FAA does? Can FAA and Boeing be really the only ones to blame here? If Boeing was in bed with FAA that much and they were dropping the ball on safety, shouldn't EASA's own process take note of that and extra-scrutinize Boeing planes during certification for Europ…

I don't recall if it is just by handshake agreement or in an actual treaty but the country where the manufacturer of a plane operates is the one designated authority over that manufacturer. FAA issues Airworthiness directives and sets rules Boeing has to follow. EASA largely defers to the FAA (not always but in almost everything). Similarly the FAA follows EASA when it comes to issues with Airbus. Both FAA and EASA r…

I believe that's only true for planes flying over/through other countries, and it is not universal. In order for a plane to be sold in EASA governed countries it has to be certified by the EASA. So in effect, the 737 is getting certified twice. In general aviation there's this common misconception that the Cirrus SR line can't recover from a stall, which is because the FAA drops spin recovery testing if you ship with a BRS (parachute). Reality is, when the SR line was certified by the EASA it was required to demonstrate spin recovery. Another discrepancy is that the EASA does not recognize "experimental" has a category of aircraft, so an FAA classified home built experimental that flies to an EASA country would not be allowed to take off after unless the national government has rules that allow it (also applies to ultralights).

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#284

Post by tomohawk »

brink wrote: post #6

What other industry is allowed to inspect itself? It completely ruins the point of an inspection. It's like being the judge and jury in your own trial. I'm amazed this is a thing in the first place.

I live in an affluent community, but the last time I had electrical work done, the government inspector missed 5 serious problems that I found, 3 of which were obvious.

It's really hard for the government to hire and retain competent people to inspect something as easy as residential wiring, even in an affluent community with plenty of money being spent to operate the government.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#285

Post by int_19h »

TylerE wrote: post #131
wanderingmind wrote: post #101

As an aside, For all those who talk about corruption and getting money out of politics I suggest reading Federalist 10 by Madison. Its a deep analysis of a need for a republican democracy. Any government that depends on human virtuousness will fail. The only way to have a sustainable government is to have strong checks and balances and putting multiple factions with different interests against one another.

While the Federalist Papers are great works, I don't agree with taking them as enlightened guidance from on high. They were theorizing. No one of them really knew how a modern democracy/republic would actually work in practice. Remember, the authors of the constitution (large overlap) stated on the record that they expected they got a lot of it wrong, and expected large swathes of it to be amended and replaced once a…

The Federalist Papers themselves point out that Constitution is not meant to be a perfect document, but merely the best that everyone could agree on.

"I never expect to see a perfect work from imperfect man. The result of the deliberations of all collective bodies must necessarily be a compound, as well of the errors and prejudices, as of the good sense and wisdom, of the individuals of whom they are composed. The compacts which are to embrace thirteen distinct States in a common bond of amity and union, must as necessarily be a compromise of as many dissimilar interests and inclinations. How can perfection spring from such materials?"

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#286

Post by [deleted] »

pi-e-sigma wrote: post #254
mulmen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard for corruption is higher than “I don’t like your decision.”

So you think anyone can get their trades reverted on the stock exchange if they ask nicely? Oopsie, I clicked the wrong button, now please revert the trade that lost me some money. If some get such preferential treatment it's clear cut case of corruption, you don't need to catch them with the proverbial smoking gun to know it

[deleted]

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#287

Post by zmgsabst »

wegfawefgawefg wrote: post #269
tw04 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And government should only have as much power as you think the worst possible people in charge should have. This immediately falls apart, by that logic we should literally have no government or society to speak of. "Only as much power as you think the worst possible person should have" would mean literally no power - there isn't a single decision in my life I would pass off to the worst person I could think of. Wha…

I know countries are different, but there are many people who are pro severely minimal government in the USA. And it does not seem so unlike the initial intentions for the country either. If you frame it as anarchy it sounds like screaming chaos. But consider for a moment that the vast majority of laws that exist that are enforcable now only recently came to be.

There’s also real trade offs:

I had fiber to my condo a decade ago in Thailand, but still don’t reliably in the US.

Regulations and government monopolies on poles and conduits slow development at the same time they reduce fires and clutter on the poles. (Whoa are there some real tangles in Thailand.)

There’s a reasonable debate on where and how much we should regulate things.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#288

Post by zmgsabst »

blibble wrote: post #280
gretch wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to all of the theoretical responses provided, I would also say that the US has withstood the test (so far). Trump is probably one of the “worst”* people and held the highest office. And yet despite the fact that it happened, the US is still chugging along. Bad things happened but the quality of life is similar to pre-trump presidency (as long as you are willing to discount for covid’s impact on the world)…

> Trump is probably one of the “worst”* people and held the highest office. And yet despite the fact that it happened, the US is still chugging along. until the next election occurs we haven't really seen the effect of the damage done in 2020 1 in 3 voters no longer believing that the electoral system is fit for purpose ("the election was stolen") is really very scary

A large fraction doesn’t view the government as fit for purpose either — as they allowed widespread, coordinated arson attacks across major cities totaling $2B+ in damages and then sent the FBI after peaceful demonstrators, based on which political faction people belonged to.

That’s some real fascism.

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#289

Post by [deleted] »

pi-e-sigma wrote: post #254
mulmen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard for corruption is higher than “I don’t like your decision.”

So you think anyone can get their trades reverted on the stock exchange if they ask nicely? Oopsie, I clicked the wrong button, now please revert the trade that lost me some money. If some get such preferential treatment it's clear cut case of corruption, you don't need to catch them with the proverbial smoking gun to know it

[deleted]

Re: US regulator considers stripping Boeing's right to self-inspect planes

#290

Post by zmgsabst »

vkou wrote: post #98
shutupnerd0000 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All very upstanding and incorrupt organizations

Would you like to tell us how the NYSE is corrupt? Or do they just get tarred with 'Well, they work in finance, of course they are all crooks' brush?

NYSE sells preferential access that allows favored players to skim without risk. The industry regulations around “market makers” and pay-for-order-flow are incredibly crooked.

There’s also a clear tolerance of securities fraud as long as you subscribe to certain ideologies — eg, NYSE allowing Disney to trade when they’re clearly stealing/destroying shareholder assets to advance the ideology of a cabal of executives and fiduciaries.

Post reply on HN