Boeing Needs an Act of Congress or Something Worse to Get Max 7 and 10 Flying

Re:Boeing Needs an Act of Congress or Something Worse to Get... by constantcrying on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @05:55PM (#33428117)

If you have written software for planes you should know that it is near impossible to fuck up this bad. It is hard to fuck up at level D like that, it is near impossible to fuck up this way at A(or was it classified at B?).

The amount of people who have to have went "this doesn't seem too important, I don't need to check this" is unfathomable. That such an error was not caught speaks of a deep rot in the entire organization, from management down to the guys writing the software.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing Needs an Act of Congress or Something Worse to Get... by grepfru_it on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @08:43PM (#33429995)

The software aspect was outsourced to a dev shop overseas

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing Needs an Act of Congress or Something Worse to Get... by tiahura on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @10:01PM (#33430596)

Good job of advertising that you haven’t read any of the reporting about how the bug arose.

But please, keep opining.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing Needs an Act of Congress or Something Worse to Get... by constantcrying on Wednesday November 02, 2022 @02:02PM (#33440284)

It is very unfortunate that safety critical software is not developed inhouse. The direct communication between engineering, development, testing and management is usually quite important.

But this is never an excuse even if this software had been delivered from a contractor it is the duty of Boeing to write specific requirements and to test them, while making sure that the requirements cover all forseeable eventualities.

This isn't frontend development. You do not just ship software some third party wrote for you.

[ Parent | on HN ]