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

Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 611 posts

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#391

Post by malfist »

tomp wrote: post #382
BartjeD wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For spilling a hot coffee cup you get $ 2.7 million worth of punitive damages. But for killing more than 200 people and trying to hide the evidence, we'll charge you 200 million and call it a day. That's less per person than the price of a hot-coffee spill.

[flagged]

> there were no victims

That is patently untrue. Even if you put aside that the law doesn't require a victim (see speeding tickets, DUIs, etc), the banks would have charged a higher interest for a riskier loan. Trump lied about his finances to make the loan risk seem lower and get a lower interest rate (or even the loan itself). The banks are a direct victim because they were cheated out of the interest rates they would have charged to reflect the higher risk they were taking on.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#392

Post by quasse »

tsunamifury wrote: post #352
ActionHank wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it does go to trial it would be great for people behind this to be directly tried for their criminal actions as well. The reality is that a company is on trial for the actions of individuals and if there is no follow through on that it will not change anything. I doubt it goes to trial as I am 99% sure that the judge will rubber stamp the whole thing because the US is a corporate driven hellscape where peasants ar…

You really want the engineer who was last on the line of decisions to go to jail? Because that’s how this will go.

Yes. This might be unfamiliar to software engineers, but there's a reason mechanical engineering and architecture (there might be more, but these are the ones I'm familiar with) schools put students through at least a semester of ethics classes.

We are literally the last line of defense in a lot of industries. From the first line of the ASME code of ethics:

> Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties.

If you can't do that, you should be in another field. Maybe software engineering at Meta would be a better fit.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#393

Post by dfxm12 »

eastbound wrote: post #387
ActionHank wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it does go to trial it would be great for people behind this to be directly tried for their criminal actions as well. The reality is that a company is on trial for the actions of individuals and if there is no follow through on that it will not change anything. I doubt it goes to trial as I am 99% sure that the judge will rubber stamp the whole thing because the US is a corporate driven hellscape where peasants ar…

95% of US inmates are on plea deal, which means the prosecutor never had to prove the charges before the (potentially) criminal admitted it. It is unfair for those who admitted the charges because they believed they couldn’t defend themselves further. So the Boeing trial being on plea deal would be on paar with that standard…

Can you explain your line of thinking for saying this?

Because to me, the standard for such a big company, getting so many public dollars, that is responsible for the safety of a ton of Americans (and more) should obviously be more strict (for at least those reasons) compared to an individual who can't afford a good lawyer who had just a little too much weed on them.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#394

Post by tsunamifury »

quasse wrote: post #392
tsunamifury wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really want the engineer who was last on the line of decisions to go to jail? Because that’s how this will go.

Yes. This might be unfamiliar to software engineers, but there's a reason mechanical engineering and architecture (there might be more, but these are the ones I'm familiar with) schools put students through at least a semester of ethics classes. We are literally the last line of defense in a lot of industries. From the first line of the ASME code of ethics: > Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welf…

This is a noble goal but unrealistic and unfair at scale. Also it belays just a wildly unrealistic understanding of how risk distribution works in corporations. It’s as if in your mind one engineer makes the singular call and sees the entire picture of the project and its risks. Where as more likely a downstream worker who very likely had an incomplete picture will be blamed.

Also the personal insult is not needed. It just makes you out to be an ass rather than someone making a point.

Consider your romantic notions might not be realistic.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#395

Post by harikb »

vlan0 wrote: post #361
tsunamifury wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really want the engineer who was last on the line of decisions to go to jail? Because that’s how this will go.

I'm sure they can try. But put yourself in the shoes of that engineer. Imagine what would go through your head. My entire MO would be CYA. Every 1on1 conversation, secretly recorded (thank you favorable NY state laws), and a paper trail a mile long. For just this reason.

I don't get what you are trying to say though. If companies can use 'a mile long paper trail', why can't the engineer do the same?. If it turns out they were forced to do X over their own objections (people do have mortgages and need medical coverage), then that manager gets the blame. Seems fair??

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#396

Post by phone8675309 »

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #358
tsunamifury wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really want the engineer who was last on the line of decisions to go to jail? Because that’s how this will go.

Such decisions are way above the pay grade of random engineers

No they are not! You are responsible for what you sign off on/seal. If you don't want that responsibility then join another profession.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#397

Post by Zigurd »

supernova87a wrote: post #25

Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…

CEO on even numbered days: All assets are always tradable.

CEO on odd numbered days: We're systemically important and need to be shielded from liability.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#398

Post by sho_hn »

tsunamifury wrote: post #394
quasse wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This might be unfamiliar to software engineers, but there's a reason mechanical engineering and architecture (there might be more, but these are the ones I'm familiar with) schools put students through at least a semester of ethics classes. We are literally the last line of defense in a lot of industries. From the first line of the ASME code of ethics: > Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welf…

This is a noble goal but unrealistic and unfair at scale. Also it belays just a wildly unrealistic understanding of how risk distribution works in corporations. It’s as if in your mind one engineer makes the singular call and sees the entire picture of the project and its risks. Where as more likely a downstream worker who very likely had an incomplete picture will be blamed. Also the personal insult is not needed. I…

I didn't read it as a "personal insult".

It's true that most software engineers never work on safety-critical systems. The nature of the products they work on, or the nature of their contributions to those products, limits the possible impact of flaws and mistakes.

Once you work on a product with safety-critical features and/or become responsible for one, there really is a marked psychological change that takes place. I've lived through that change in my own career, and many comments (including some I've written, I'm sure) now strike me as callous and trivializing important matters to an extent that grates.

It's important to hold engineers accountable for their work in proportion to their impact, which is typically very significant. If you build machines that can kill, stakes should exist for you as well.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#399

Post by abeppu »

> If the deal is accepted, it could complicate Boeing’s ability to sell products to the U.S. government as a felon, though the company could seek waivers. About 32% of Boeing’s nearly $78 billion in revenue last year came from its defense, space and security unit.

My understanding is that getting security clearance involves a bunch of checks and statements about your character, and having a federal felony conviction on one's record would be a hard blocker.

Absolutely, I think that the real punishment, beyond the $245M fine, ought to be losing its many many billions of DoD contracts. After all, once a firm has demonstrated this kind of behavior, how on earth should we trust it with not only taxpayer dollars but the lives of servicemen/women and critical military resources?

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#400

Post by AndrewKemendo »

account42 wrote: post #381
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boards run corporations on behalf of investors through vague and soft guidance so as not to directly be considered officers CEOs are appointed based on their ability to do what the board wants while shielding the board - this is why they get paid the most Until investors and the board significantly hurt, to the point where their investment is either a total loss, or they are liable for additional financial inputs the…

Ok but are you arguing for or against holding CEOs liable? If that big CEO paycheck came with some actual risks if you ignored ethics then maybe there would be fewer CEOs willing to do that.

I’m saying that its all a ruse

Boards want the media to focus on the CEO because they are literally there to shield the board from accountability while “taking the brunt” of the bad PR - and also being a show piece for the company in good times

So, the real answer IMO is to change the law to implicate board members and investors directly as though they are officers equivalent with the CEO is setting corporate direction and incentives

Of course they have intentionally made the law such that any actions taken by the corporation, limit the liability of the board legally, while not taking the power away from the board to drive the direction and priorities and incentives of the corporation

The whole thing is an accountability shell game - Wherein a CEO is the whipping boy for whatever the board needs them to be the whipping boy for - and there’s a balance and ownership

The simplest way to put it is that the CEO is there to ensure that everything, the company does benefits investors primarily.

Until it is legally the case that corporate leadership must prioritize the benefits to labor above investors, nothing functionally is going to change.

Post reply on HN