|
You forgot the Prime Suspect: Bill Gates.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
You only blame them because google skewed its search results to point the finger away from itself.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good one 
|
|
|
|
|
I love how the site tells me about cookies and then tells me to choose "Yes" if I want personal ads and "No" if I don't, but I can't select anything, and then there's only a single button "Submit" 
Now that DOES seem like something I could blame on a developer (and possibly a tester for not noticing this) 
I think every manager who blames mistakes on subordinates should be fired on the spot.
"We hired the cheapest we could get on the other side of the globe and we fired our own senior programmers, and all in all it's their fault if it's broken."
There's even a saying for that kind of stupidity... You get what you pay for! 
Too bad these managers probably got millions in bonuses for staying in budget and delivering on time while 356 people were killed 
Once again, everyone was wronged, except those doing the wrongs.
And they say crime doesn't pay...
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I love how the site tells me about cookies and then tells me to choose "Yes" if I want personal ads and "No" if I don't, but I can't select anything, and then there's only a single button "Submit"
Now that DOES seem like something I could blame on a developer (and possibly a tester for not noticing this)
Interesting you should choose this for your example. I can tell you this much, it's not a developer who decided that a web site should warn about cookies.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: it's not a developer who decided that a web site should warn about cookies.
But it is a developer who implemented it badly 
Telling me there's a choice and not letting me pick...
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: But it is a developer who implemented it badly
Sure. And then it got approved and got pushed out the door in that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I love how the site tells me about cookies and then tells me to choose "Yes" if I want personal ads and "No" if I don't, but I can't select anything, and then there's only a single button "Submit"
They probably gave up maintaining it because they use www.youronlinechoices.eu, so they don't actually have to have anything complicated on their pages.Sander Rossel wrote: everyone was wronged, except those doing the wrongs
Exactly -- as long as you include "suffering a terrifying and horrific death" as a "wrong".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Exactly -- as long as you include "suffering a terrifying and horrific death" as a "wrong".
I'm calling that a "maybe" 
|
|
|
|
|
It was software that failed, ultimately.
The cause is poor aerodynamics caused by fitting a large diameter engine to a plane that sits very low on the tarmac. Airbus didnt have this problem, it sits much higher.
What I dont understand is why the software kicked in when there wasnt a stall, and didnt disconnect when the planes attitude went level/nose down.
There is a serious screw up here.
|
|
|
|
|
Because a damaged sensor was reporting the wrong speed and/or angle. Turns out it was only one sensor, no backup sensors to signal a problem. So it was not a software problem only. The whole plane is a dangerous garbage and I wonder if the other Boeing planes are the same junk. I will check from now on with the airline company if the plane I'm about to fly on is Boeing.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus, and no effective manual override.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus f***ing christ, a pilot who cant override BS software? Who the hell would want to fly it!
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that there is an override, it is possible to turn off MCAS via switches on the flightdeck.
Apparently the problem is that if you turn off MCAS and use the trim switches on the control column MCAS kicks back in.
So apparently the way to handle an MCAS failure is to wait for MCAS(apparently it cycles on and off on for a certain number of seconds) to cycle off and at that point switch off MCAS.
The apparent problem being that at the point MCAS cycles off the trim is in all likelihood far down and you might have 250+ manual turns of the trim wheel to trim for stable flight again.
There is no way one can pull back on the control column when the trim is down as the aerodynamic force on the elevator is too strong to be countered without using trim.
So I understand that there is a lot to understand and coordinate in order to override MCAS and apparently if you accidentally so much as touch the trim control on the column MCAS apparently kicks in again.
[hopefully I have enough 'apparently' words in the post to avoid being sued for every last penny]
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Sued for what? Every single Max 737 is grounded because it is equipped with an effective self crash system. That should be pretty obvious by now.
Apparently.
Apparently.Apparently.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a total c**k up to me. HOw the hell did they ever let it fly!
|
|
|
|
|
Idiotic management + outsourcing in that nation for peanuts + idiotic management ^ 2 ("Former Boeing software engineer Mark Rabin told Bloomberg that a manager said at an all-hands meeting that senior engineers were no longer required at the company.") = disaster where people lost lives and they will lose anything down to their backport and beyond.
I wonder if the savings they had outsourcing to that nation compensate the losses they already had (1 billion in a quarter) and the ones they will have for the decades to come. My guess is no, they spent a lot to save very little.
Boeing outsourced 737 Max software development and testing: Bloomberg - Business Insider[^]
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I wonder if the savings they had outsourcing to that nation compensate the losses they already had (1 billion in a quarter) and the ones they will have for the decades to come. My guess is no, they spent a lot to save very little.
And you are totally right.
The problem is that there are a huge amount of managers who are still thinking the same way, ignoring what the investigations are bringing up to light and living in their bubble where they are the smartest pals around.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
It's the "yes but my situation is different" and "ok but I'm smarter" mentality that elephants them every single time.
I believe Boeing management in its entirety should be removed from charge and removed from any management charge in their lifetime.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
modified 8-Jul-19 10:36am.
|
|
|
|
|
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The chocolate would never make it to the machine.
Technician
1. A person that fixes stuff you can't.
2. One who does precision guesswork based on unreliable data provided by those of questionable knowledge.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
Wake me up when they can print bacon.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
