← Back to context

Comment by DrNosferatu

4 days ago

From another continent, genuinely curious about Trump voters on this:

- Does anyone here at HN stand for this action?

- If so, do you think there's a conflict of interest? How do stand on this possible conflict?

If you just look at this part:

> ...look at the current system, learn what air traffic controllers like and dislike about their current tools, and envision how we can make a new, better, modern and safer system.

Do you think there is anything wrong?

  • In isolation, no - but this is not about an isolated topic: a transparent public call to tender, with due process, would be necessary if a government wanted to overhaul their ATC systems.

    I personally view the action of giving a task to a company (SpaceX) that is legally under the oversight of the regulator (FAA) whose inner systems are to be overhauled - without contest - as problematic.

    But maybe that's just cultural...

  • Making new tools doesn't solve the understaffing issue which is the main problem. Unless they think they can make a new system which reduces the staff necessary? The only way I see of doing that is introducing some level of AI, which is a bad idea for multiple reasons.

    And new systems are so few and far between because of the layers of safety and regulation testing that must be met. Though it sounds like those may be reduced in the name of efficiency.

  • What ?

    I’ve seen corrupt and broken contracts. The English is very reasonable.

    People make lots of effort to make strange behavior look normal.

    Hell - I know that the right sounding clause can basically buy you a full month of televised debate, where people point to the trees and miss the forest.

    Why the heck does the president go to Mar A Lago ? His own hotel? And get the government to pay them ?

    How the heck is it ok, for the second in command to bring his own team in?

    Because it’s in America and this can’t be corruption?

    American exceptionalism was built on overcoming basic mediocrity- and it would never stand for such an obvious conflict of interest.

    TLDR: of course the language is going to sound good. What do people think the clauses will say ?

    “Herein I take an oath that my actions are 100% corrupt?”

    Obviously not.

  • The process seems fine. But why SpaceX?

    • The tweet contained an open call for others to also collaborate. Is there any problem with SpaceX doing it or doing it first?

      I have to admit I get a bit of a knee-jerk reaction about even the appearance of conflict of interest, but if money isn't changing hands then I can't see a problem really. Regulators regularly collaborate with stakeholders, so why not experts in peripheral / somewhat related fields?

      And really, conflict of interest seems to not matter in the slightest in American politics, what with senators and bureaucrats and their spouses etc getting enormous grants and setting up "non-profits", there must be an enormous list of concerning conflicts worse than this.

      1 reply →