does Society expect engineers to stop people dying?

The problem of trying to vindictively silence whistleblowers seems to be an accelerating trend in the US, the US Government has prosecuted more whistleblowers under Obama than all other previous US Presidents combined.

Was Harley Copp a traitor to GM or a hero?  I don't see someone in an organization that sees clear wrongdoing being committed and speaks out about it as being a problem. In fact it is quite the opposite and often requires far more bravery and virtue than simply following orders like a good German. Calling such a person a "traitor" or "disloyal" just shows a perverted moral sense in that loyalty is held as being more important than what is morally right or in the clear best interests of the society at large.

Unconditional loyalty to an (any) organization is surely among the more dangerous of all social pathologies. 

But whistleblower can have an emotive usage too, it implies justification.

So without being too political*, some of the Wikileaks/Snowen stuff pushes the definition for me because it was so indiscriminate.

I remember from a finance textbook once that the term, at least in the UK, was 'qualified disclosure'. Which sounds corporatese, but I think summarises well the idea behind it.

*a more neutral example would probably be all the leaked Sony email

Edited by Ross Stonefeld, 22 April 2015 - 14:40.

Snowden's revelations were the equivalent revelaing a nuclear blast when the tinfoil hatters (of which I am) were going on about 500 pound bombs, while everyone else dismissed us as looney.  The level of spying is far, far worse than anything I had imagined they were up to. Amusingly, rather than gel the population with the tinfoil hatters into some sort of publc stand, there's an even louder chorus of "well I'm not doing anything illegal so I don't care".  It must be defense of the  cognitive dissonance between "I can trust my government" and "my government is astoundingly intrusive in my private communications".</OT>

Giant Evercorp that I work for has a very well-established no retaliation policy in place for people who raise issues.  There's a link installed on everyone's desktop to permit them raise issues to the ombuds team. I've seen it in practice and can attest that the policy is in fact so effective, that individuals who abuse the system (raising numerous cases to the ombuds that were all deemed to be without merit), escape any sort of discipline.

Absolutely disgusting. I am without words.
http://t.thestar.com...ourt-rules.html

"The ruling could save the company between 7 and 10 billion dollars in payouts"

So what is the real cost of a car?

Snowden's revelations were the equivalent revelaing a nuclear blast when the tinfoil hatters (of which I am) were going on about 500 pound bombs, while everyone else dismissed us as looney.  The level of spying is far, far worse than anything I had imagined they were up to. Amusingly, rather than gel the population with the tinfoil hatters into some sort of publc stand, there's an even louder chorus of "well I'm not doing anything illegal so I don't care".  It must be defense of the  cognitive dissonance between "I can trust my government" and "my government is astoundingly intrusive in my private communications".</OT>
 
Giant Evercorp that I work for has a very well-established no retaliation policy in place for people who raise issues.  There's a link installed on everyone's desktop to permit them raise issues to the ombuds team. I've seen it in practice and can attest that the policy is in fact so effective, that individuals who abuse the system (raising numerous cases to the ombuds that were all deemed to be without merit), escape any sort of discipline.

YesbutCanuck, there are things in life that you may not know how they work, but they work to protect you and yours...people, country's and companies have been spying on one another since Adam was a pup! Don't make it right, but knowledge is power and you will be at a disadvantage if you don't at least maintain some sort of non-deer in the headlights information gathering process.

I have no doubt that Snowden (the traitor) put lives in jeopardy and could have cost people lives...he was employed under an official secrets act, which, it is made abundantly clear, is deadly serious and has deadly serious penalties for those who deliberately act against the role or function of the organisation. People can be shot on the battlefield for such acts.

Apart from the obvious glitches and human failings along the way (Watergate FFS! couldn't think of a Canuck equivalent), you should trust your government, and let them get on with the business of keeping you safe. 

So what is the real cost of a car?

The car?? What is the real cost of 84 people? This is not like it was an unknown, or a problem with a difficult solution. It is indefensible.

My point is that GM have saved 7 - 10 $B by denying the public the right to sue for damages. What should their products "really" cost if they had to make these payments.

The bankruptcy deal was brokered amongst adults, many of whom were paid to stand up for your rights. You voted for them.

No, I believe you voted for the people who at best acquiesced in the deal. And you'll probably vote for them next time.

I could put my moral relativist hat on and say that there are far cheaper ways of bettering mankind's lot than 7 billion dollars for 84 lives, but that usually causes conniptions and hot air. 25 bucks to Fred Hollowes gives someone their sight back, THAT'S bang for a buck.

275- this presumes that the government in question - the American, is somehow looking out for my interests. Laughable. Yes, certainly some overlap, but I reject the notion that it should be acceptable to have foreign spies hacking my government officials. Hacking the blackberry phones of the government officials sitting across the table at trade meetings hardly seems to be keeping me safe.

There's some clever obfuscation of that fact when people trot out the "it's for your own good" argument. At best, the interests of my country are best not left to foreigners to manage. At worst, they're government backed corporate spies and nothing more.

Ahhh...the condescending pat on the head.  Thanks.

Ahhh...the condescending pat on the head.  Thanks.

Yeerrr most welcome...would you like fries with that?

Having glimpsed through the last couple of pages here it seems that some expect all vehicles to be 100% fail safe. And some have brand name fixations too.

There has been many fairly bad cars from a multitude of manufacturers over the years. Cheap imports will always star in that category. Some generic [to the US] models with faults have been grossly over criticised. Because LAWYERS can sue Ford GM etc. A lot harder to sue a import manufacturer of small volumes.

These days some of the trendy crap fitted too cars are causing problems, as on occasion it appears o the electronics. I do know that all the electronic marvels are causing mayhem when it fails. All to often.

Ralph Naders lack of contribution is just a half assed ill informed rant. Yes the Corvair had problems, so did dozens of other cars. The only one seriously mentioned was VW, which were a far worse car, though did get better over the years.

Price will always play a part, a cheap car is generally not as good as a more expensive one. though many Euro prams are fairly awfull too, and have no parts availability.

Noone has mentioned Nikki, a poor late 80s Eastern Euro version of a 600 Fiat, itself not a great car either. But people still buy these type lemons on price alone. Currently mostly from China. 

An announcement this morning in the media from some Chinese manufacturer that they expect to roll Toyota as No1! That is here in Oz. Their sister brand is Great Wall, generally a very poor vehicle, though better than some other Chinese imports. 

Another manufacturer that at least here in Oz with a bad rep is Jeep. Unreliable, expensive to maintain dungers too. And now I am seeing the 'Fix It Again Tony' branding on some Chrysler products.

With all the government b/s about safety standards but then they send the military out in metal boxes without seat belts.

Or seemingly everywhere public transport with people STANDING on moving vehicles, made from  a sheet of alloy with a series of pipes as part of the interior,,,  oh and again no seat belts, crumple zones, lack of side impact areas etc etc. Usually driven by it seems these days a refugee from somewhere. yes,, I mean buses. All serious death traps and they crash and injure daily. Trains and trams are little better either but generally do not run in traffic!

With all this crashing and inuring, you must have some statistics to back up your thesis that buses, trams and trains are worse than cars.

Oh, and trams run on roads they share with cars, so there can be incidents. And trains also have accidents with motor vehicles, usually because the vehicle is parked on the track. 

With all this crashing and inuring, you must have some statistics to back up your thesis that buses, trams and trains are worse than cars.

 

Oh, and trams run on roads they share with cars, so there can be incidents. And trains also have accidents with motor vehicles, usually because the vehicle is parked on the track. 

Grow up. Look at public notices in newspapers. ,,, accident between bus and car, or unidentified car caused the bus to brake suddenly causing minor injuries from the STANDING passengers.

Buses are death traps, get in a passenger vehicle and you must have a raft of [generally] sensible design rules to make the vehicles safer for occupants. Then a bus, light steel frame on what is basically [in some cases is] a truck chassis skinned in light guage aluminium. Brakes steering and suspension are truck items then lets fill it with humans, and then generally not provide seat belts or even seats for them.If they do have seats it is a 30mm round steel frame with effectively a canvas sling. trucks have to have far more safety features carrying generally only a driver!

Passenger coaches these days are generally a little better with decent seats and seat belts. Though daily we read about another crashing somewhere in the world with many injuries and deaths.

Big hooha here a few years back about school buses without seat belts, especially in rural areas. And quite rightly, many of those buses still are shitty old Bedfords that are 30 plus years old and have nowhere to mount seat belts. Some are Toyota Coasters etc which generally do

But metro kids get to stand on the bus,, bugger the seat belts!! And remember many of these death traps are on freeway routes and doing up to 100kmh.

young lady I know was booked for not having her grumpy [as they often areat 6pm] 3 y/o restrained and lost her liscence for a period. So then had to catch a bus STANDING holding her  3 y/o's hand. Hypocrisy personified.

I do know many people that have had minor injuries on buses and other public transport. The ones I know where not serious though there has been many.

And as for trams [and some trains too] being on roads, yes they do. Though at least you know the driver is not going to lean on the indicator and carve through 3 lanes of traffic in front of all traffic.Or pull out of a bus stop in front of you, or change lanes and squeeze you into the kerb. That when driving 23 tonnes of truck and load.

Personally I have been run into parked cars and the kerb on a bicycle [a major reason I do not ride one now and criticise the fools that do] by  bus. I have can openered a bus that squeezed me into the kerb with the bull bar on my car and been hit twice when stopping for lights by buses. And standing passengers where injured slightly in both of those.

When we had an extended train shutdown recently and my street was often used by the 'alternative' death traps. Every kerb on corners, give way signs and street signs were hit and damaged plus there was several small fender benders too.  A friends girlfriend was driving one and she was the only one that did not hit a stationary object. The obvious damage to the buses on all 4 corners sometimes was an indicator of potential passenger injuries. As is being unable to negotiate roundabouts where again the standing passenger can be thrown around as the drive OVER them.

A thing for the engineers,, make a safe bus. That will NEVER happen!

Grow up. Look at public notices in newspapers. ,,, accident between bus and car, or unidentified car caused the bus to brake suddenly causing minor injuries from the STANDING passengers.

 

Buses are death traps, get in a passenger vehicle and you must have a raft of [generally] sensible design rules to make the vehicles safer for occupants. Then a bus, light steel frame on what is basically [in some cases is] a truck chassis skinned in light guage aluminium. Brakes steering and suspension are truck items then lets fill it with humans, and then generally not provide seat belts or even seats for them.If they do have seats it is a 30mm round steel frame with effectively a canvas sling. trucks have to have far more safety features carrying generally only a driver!

 

Passenger coaches these days are generally a little better with decent seats and seat belts. Though daily we read about another crashing somewhere in the world with many injuries and deaths.

 

Big hooha here a few years back about school buses without seat belts, especially in rural areas. And quite rightly, many of those buses still are shitty old Bedfords that are 30 plus years old and have nowhere to mount seat belts. Some are Toyota Coasters etc which generally do

But metro kids get to stand on the bus,, bugger the seat belts!! And remember many of these death traps are on freeway routes and doing up to 100kmh.

 

young lady I know was booked for not having her grumpy [as they often areat 6pm] 3 y/o restrained and lost her liscence for a period. So then had to catch a bus STANDING holding her  3 y/o's hand. Hypocrisy personified.

 

I do know many people that have had minor injuries on buses and other public transport. The ones I know where not serious though there has been many.

And as for trams [and some trains too] being on roads, yes they do. Though at least you know the driver is not going to lean on the indicator and carve through 3 lanes of traffic in front of all traffic.Or pull out of a bus stop in front of you, or change lanes and squeeze you into the kerb. That when driving 23 tonnes of truck and load.

 

Personally I have been run into parked cars and the kerb on a bicycle [a major reason I do not ride one now and criticise the fools that do] by  bus. I have can openered a bus that squeezed me into the kerb with the bull bar on my car and been hit twice when stopping for lights by buses. And standing passengers where injured slightly in both of those.

 

When we had an extended train shutdown recently and my street was often used by the 'alternative' death traps. Every kerb on corners, give way signs and street signs were hit and damaged plus there was several small fender benders too.  A friends girlfriend was driving one and she was the only one that did not hit a stationary object. The obvious damage to the buses on all 4 corners sometimes was an indicator of potential passenger injuries. As is being unable to negotiate roundabouts where again the standing passenger can be thrown around as the drive OVER them.

 

A thing for the engineers,, make a safe bus. That will NEVER happen!

I take it that was a "no" to Wuzak's question?

I'll put another angle forward on this prompted by the references to " charismatic chief engineers" , "morality and "profit before safety" etc.

Back in the 1970's when California began its legal action to reduce emissions like HC and NOX ,and the US government began to demand airbags and roll over protection etc. the atttitude of many very senior european auto engineers was one of , frankly, total intellectual distain for anything  being done in the USA.

The Californian emissons rules were described, quite literally, by euro enginers as " why bother with so much cost and engine efficiency impact just for one city in America (LA) which only has a problem on sunny days" . As the US emissions laws pointed the way to unleaded fuel the outrage in the european enginering/pres was overwhelming. 

"Unleaded fuel wil destroy compression ratios forever as wlll EGR and the world wil run out of fuel due to the silly Americans."

Airbags and roll over rules brought out  something close to total intellectual supremacy of europeans versus those stupid Americans " They only need airbags in the USA because they are too stupid to do what smarter europeans do and buckle up". On roll over etc. " if those stupid US engineers knew anything about handling like us they wouldn't build cars that rolled over".

I am parphrasing but that was the level at which many Euro enginers saw the US rules. Today of course EU cars have legally required airbags and rollover stds. The new Euro 6 diesel emissions standards are pretty much what California has insisted on for decades.

Ultimately those highly qualified engineers were arguing against  safety improvements etc in their markets through personal  distaste of It and  nothing to do with corporate profit because as they spoke out they were all busy designing in compliance to Californian emissions and US federal safety rules on export cars.

Strangely the bean counters were actually more pushing safety than the engineers simply because they knew how much profit came from US sales.

Edited by mariner, 26 April 2015 - 15:13.

I take it that was a "no" to Wuzak's question?

It will always be a no. As you would know Dmitriy, bus and rail travel are many times safer than car.

Edited by gruntguru, 26 April 2015 - 22:46.

This is a tangent, but is there a good place to read an unbiased account of the whole Corvair/Nader thing? I just cracked open my copy of Race Car Vehicle Dynamics, on which page 449 claims that the Corvair was 'exonerated' among other things. Obviously Unsafe At Any Speed would be the counterpoint. Please excuse my ignorance on the subject, but I was born a good decade after it all happened and I've only heard snide remarks about the subject.

You know, folks here might regard this suggestion with some dubiety, but Unsafe at Any Speed is, all things considered, pretty fair and balanced toward the Corvair. Nader was actually rather kind toward the car, citing its economy, sportiness, etc. He had one problem with it, its handling, and as he saw it, a $14 camber compensator would have squared it all away. 

I'm sure I have mentioned this before, but only one chapter in the book is about the Corvair, and the rest consists of rather mild suggestions like padded dashes and collapsing steering columns, stuff that is base equipment today. Nader was among the first modern consumer activists, one could say, and in the '60s that just wasn't the done thing.  Serious critique of a consumer product was regarded as an attack on capitalism itself, and Nader came across as a Maoist to the American business community. He scared the Jeebus out of them -- hence the somewhat over-the-top counterattack. 

Nader at a Corvair club meet many years later. A good time had by all.  

My point is that GM have saved 7 - 10 $B by denying the public the right to sue for damages. What should their products "really" cost if they had to make these payments.

About the same, I would estimate. GM must price its products competitively or it can't sell them. 

Absolutely disgusting. I am without words.
http://t.thestar.com...ourt-rules.html

I have no reason to believe that the judge considered anything but the facts and law of the case, and that in his learned opinion, under our bankruptcy laws the new General Motors will not be be held responsible for the actions of the old General Motors in this matter. 

I blame General Motors alone for using the court to evade responsibility. Although I don't agree or approve of the legal ploy, I understand why the company did it. In all likelihood, GM can afford to pay the court judgements (and there is already a rather generous compensation plan administered by Kenneth Feinberg). However, corporations are the ultimate control freaks, and staring down scores of unspecified civil judgements was more than GM's delicate emotional system could handle. 

Edited by Magoo, 26 April 2015 - 23:25.

I take it that was a "no" to Wuzak's question?

Errrr! Just reading todays media about putting electronic equipment in Melbourne trams [ either the drivers are useless or the trams are! And probably electronic equipment will cause more prangs] melbourne trams were involved in 824 crashes with cars in 2014.. trams carrying unrestrained passengers, many standing! plus 15 trams ran into each other.

Do you think I may just have a point!

Errrr! Just reading todays media about putting electronic equipment in Melbourne trams [ either the drivers are useless or the trams are! And probably electronic equipment will cause more prangs] melbourne trams were involved in 824 crashes with cars in 2014.. trams carrying unrestrained passengers, many standing! plus 15 trams ran into each other.

Do you think I may just have a point!

How do those death per mile statistics look?

Errrr! Just reading todays media about putting electronic equipment in Melbourne trams [ either the drivers are useless or the trams are! And probably electronic equipment will cause more prangs] melbourne trams were involved in 824 crashes with cars in 2014.. trams carrying unrestrained passengers, many standing! plus 15 trams ran into each other.

Do you think I may just have a point!

How many people seriously injured or killed? Lightly injured?

How many minor car accidents in Melbourne CBD in the same year? How many car deaths?

I guess since I use public transport on a daily basis I my days are numbered?

Gladwell discussing the topic title. http://www.newyorker...ngineers-lament

Gladwell discussing the topic title. http://www.newyorker...ngineers-lament

Good read, typical Gladwell. 

Small world dept: I was contacted and provided a few leads.

How many people seriously injured or killed? Lightly injured?

 

How many minor car accidents in Melbourne CBD in the same year? How many car deaths?

 

I guess since I use public transport on a daily basis I my days are numbered?

Those figures have always been hidden. An aquaintance worked for the STA here a decade ago. And there was injuries and crashes nearly every day. Most only minor ofcourse.Bruises, twisted ankles and the like. That is how they hide them. This is buses, add trains and trams where he was not. The well publicised Obahn crash made the driver public enemy no1. Which he was not, the system was lax and encouraged complacency.

How do those death per mile statistics look?

824 crashes makes long distance trucks look very good. Even cabs, where the passengers have a seat and belts!

I had a near death experience on the bus the other night.

A car driver decided that the half car length space in front of the bus was good enough for him* to squeeze into, so he cut across forcing the bus to brake hard to avoid a collision.

On the bus there was utter devestation. Thankfully it was only half full so all passengers were seated, though unrestrained.

I think one passenger may have dropped their phone....

*No idea if the driver was male or female

I have been on a bus standing when the driver had to brake hard. I stumbled, but did not fall, and slightly hit one of the seated passengers. I was not injured in the incident, and nor was anyone else.

I have only been on a bus once when there was an actual collision. The bus was pulling away from the stop and hit a car in the lane. The car was not moving, as the traffic lights had only just turned green. The driver probably saw the bus' indicator and observed the give way rule, so did not take off. Only light contact and noone was injured (except the bus driver's pride).

That's about it for incidents in the last 5 years of catching buses for me.

824 crashes makes long distance trucks look very good. Even cabs, where the passengers have a seat and belts!

In raw numbers? In accidents per trip? In accidents per km? People killed? People ripped off (100% of the time in taxis)?

I had a near death experience on the bus the other night.
 
A car driver decided that the half car length space in front of the bus was good enough for him* to squeeze into, so he cut across forcing the bus to brake hard to avoid a collision.
 
On the bus there was utter devestation. Thankfully it was only half full so all passengers were seated, though unrestrained.
 
I think one passenger may have dropped their phone....
 
 
*No idea if the driver was male or female
 
I have been on a bus standing when the driver had to brake hard. I stumbled, but did not fall, and slightly hit one of the seated passengers. I was not injured in the incident, and nor was anyone else.
 
I have only been on a bus once when there was an actual collision. The bus was pulling away from the stop and hit a car in the lane. The car was not moving, as the traffic lights had only just turned green. The driver probably saw the bus' indicator and observed the give way rule, so did not take off. Only light contact and noone was injured (except the bus driver's pride).
 
That's about it for incidents in the last 5 years of catching buses for me.

OMG that's appalling, Android or iPhone? What model? Is it going to be OK?

I am not sure....

I just heard it hit the floor. It may have even been a Windows phone.

I am not sure....
 
I just heard it hit the floor. It may have even been a Windows phone.

Definite broken screen if it was an I-Phone.

Definite broken screen if it was an I-Phone.