DOJ fines Boeing over $2.5B, charges it with fraud conspiracy • Hacker News Board

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

#51

Post by kryogen1c » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 3:13 AM UTC

csours wrote: post #13

RachelF wrote: post #3

So anyone at Boeing going to jail for killing 346 people?

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…

> Blaming individuals is very satisfying

"Responsibility is a unique concept... You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you... If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion, or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else. Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you have never had anyone really responsible."

Hyman G. Rickover, father of the US nuclear navy

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

#52

Post by 1123581321 » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

haltingproblem wrote: post #44

blendergeek wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You fully and entirely misunderstand the argument. The argument is that after the McDonnel Douglas merger, the "idyllic culture of building great and safe products" was pillaged and destroyed by greedy corporate overlords. At this point (so goes the argument) all the "good engineers" who would have most certainly spoken up were laid off and were replaced with dime-a-dozen engineers who were overworked, underpaid, and…

Sigh. The mythmaking contines. In the theory of causation, we distinguish between proximate vs. ultimate causality. Every proximate event can plausibly be claimed to be the cause for a subsequent event. As they say for want of a nail the war was lost. We don't say the war was lost because the nail was missing because 20 years ago they changed the way they cataloged the nails in the hardware store which sold the nails…

This is uninteresting as the engineers are only making a limited point that the superior character of the engineering organization has been lost, relative to the demands of buyers and the FAA. It’s not a novel theory to suggest a merger or acquisition can cause this to happen more obviously than a national or world event.

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

#53

Post by civilized » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 3:17 AM UTC

kryogen1c wrote: post #51

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…

> Blaming individuals is very satisfying "Responsibility is a unique concept... You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you... If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion, or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else. Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you hav…

Rental roommates are jointly and severally liable, but in a corporation everybody gets to pass the buck

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

#54

Post by nceqs3 » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 3:45 AM UTC

derwiki wrote: post #23

Down 0.6% in after hours trading. Does this mean investors consider this a win?

It has already been factored into the share price. This is very very common. See 1MDB-Goldman announcement. Share price was up on the day Goldman pleaded guilty and agreed to pay billions in fines.

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

#55

Post by spaetzleesser » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:23 AM UTC

csours wrote: post #13

RachelF wrote: post #3

So anyone at Boeing going to jail for killing 346 people?

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…

At a minimum put a fine on them that's high so they really want to avoid it. Seems most fines are only large enough to not cause the company too much pain.

Or another way would be to temporarily send the company to "jail" meaning to suspend its operations for a while.

When you look at this example or what happens to banks when they support criminal activity like money laundering or tax evasion the fines are simply way too low for them to stop doing bad stuff.

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

#56

Post by Rexxar » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:24 AM UTC

chii wrote: post #46

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.

that just leads the blame onto a scapegoat. It doesn't fix the problem at heart - which is that the responsibility for safety has to be taken at the org at every level.

The CEO is the one who has the more power to avoid it and they have incredibly high salary often justified because they are "risk takers". They take the money, so they can take the responsibility with it. And for information, the law is like that in other countries I know.

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

#57

Post by spaetzleesser » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:24 AM UTC

heymijo wrote: post #37

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…

The CEO for starters. Post-Enron accounting rules via Sarbanes-Oxley made it so that the CEO had to sign off on and certify the financial statements. The buck stopped there. [0] Why not here as well? Unless you are thinking about putting the system that incentivizes a CEO and company to do this on trial. [0] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2014-152

Top management definitely should lose their high salaries in such a case. The worst that seems to happen to them is to have to resign and get a huge severance package. That's not punishment.

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

#58

Post by csours » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:29 AM UTC

kryogen1c wrote: post #51

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…

> Blaming individuals is very satisfying "Responsibility is a unique concept... You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you... If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion, or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else. Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you hav…

This is the best context I can find:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Hearings/IcO0QpCJdQYC?h...

I strongly agree with his comments in their original context.

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

#59

Post by paulmd » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:36 AM UTC

lallysingh wrote: post #7

Trias11 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one who has $2.5B is going to jail for anything.

Martha Stewart? But that was securities fraud, the only true crime.

The one thing that will absolutely send you straight to jail 100% of the time is playing games with rich people's money.

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

#60

Post by csours » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 4:48 AM UTC

mayneack wrote: post #39

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…

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.

And they charged the corporation. They also have a consent decree. You can be sure that under the consent decree both the corporation and everyone in it are under a microscope. A consent decree is, among other things, like probation. If they mess up again, the DOJ will drop the hammer.

A lot of people seem to think that punishment makes people care more somehow, but punishment is always a distant possibility at the time of the wrongdoing. People don't generally think they are committing serious wrongdoing, humans are really good at rationalizing our actions, especially when each individual action is a small step.