Comment by olliej

6 years ago

> In effect you've just shifted the blame.

No. If the bug was in the software (say the bug was numeric underflow leading to crashing) it would be software. In this case the software engineers would have been told "here is your current AoA" and adjust the plane correctly in response. The hardware engineers/designers then provided them with unvalidated data, and I assume no details on the error rate (presumably because that would get the whole system flagged by the FAA as being nonsense)

> Degrees aren't free either. Most developers aren't working in aerospace and won't need the rigour.

"most" != all, literally my point. Also at what level does it kick in: OS developers? If they're using a licensed OS like QNX should all the QNX engineers need to be certified for avionics? How about linux?

> I'm not talking about OSS

So you're saying OSS shouldn't be used in commercial industry?

If you work on linux: that's used in medical hardware, so it seems like all contributors should have your new Certificate in Not Killing People.

But also, at what distance from killing people does this license cease being relevant? You worked on (say) a firewall product on some device, it fails to prevent some attack and the medical device kills someone.

Or the radio stack?

etc

> I assume no details on the error rate

A perfect example of why the title engineer needs to be earned. This is a baseless assumption given that literally anything could go wrong. Sensors could become damaged, circuits broken, etc.. It is our job to plan for edge cases.

> But also, at what distance from killing people does this license cease being relevant?

The last link in the chain: The engineers who put their stamp of approval on the system being shipped to consumers (aka Boeing employees). If you're willing to risk human life on the fact the Linux kernel is acceptable for this task, then you should damn well be able to risk your job title.

If Linux isn't up to the task then why is it being used?

  • > Sensors could become damaged, circuits broken, etc.. It is our job to plan for edge cases.

    Not those edge cases. They have nothing to do with the core competencies of a software engineer and should be offloaded to someone who is competent. Do architects plan for edge cases where the steel beams were actually made of wood?